Skip to main content

Full text of "The Arabic versions of the Pentateuch in the church of Egypt; a study from manuscript sources (IX-XVII century)"

See other formats















•^ ; 
















Ex parte nostra nihil obstat iiuominus imprimatur. 

Eoroae. die 1<> Martii VJU 
L. S. 

Fk, Pacu-icus Mokza. 
Min. Glis 0. F. M. 


Fb. Albebtus Lei'idi 0. P 
S. P. A. Magister. 


Feanciscus Faberi, 
Vic. Urbis Adsessor. 



Preface 9 


The C'liristiau Arabic Versions, a field practically unexplored ... 11 

Rise and Development of the Arabic Versions in general 13 

The Origin, Age and Nature of the Arabic Versions in Egypt, an 

obscure and unsolved problem 18 

Question must be decided from Study of MS8 23 







A. The Copto-Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

List of the MSS - 27 

What has been Published of these MSS 28 

B. MSS. Containing the Pentateuch in Arabic only 

Catalogue of the More Important MSS 29 

a) In the Florentine Library 30 

b) In the Vatican Library 30 

c) In the Royal Library at Berlin 30 

d) In the Imperial library at \'ienna 30 

e) In the Royal State Library at Munich 30 

f) In the Liljrary of the Leyden Academy 31 

g) In the British Museum 31 

h) In the Bodleian Library, Oxford 31 

i) In the National Library at Paris 32 



List of the Arabic and Copto-Arabic MSS. utilized in this Study . 34 

List of Abbreviations 34 

1) Vatican Library Copt. 1 ^ A 35 

2) Vatican Library Copt. 2— 4 = B 42 

6 Table of ContctUs 


3) B. K. Paris. Copt. 1 = C id 

4) Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 33= D b-2 

0) British Museum or. 422 = G 54 


1) B. N. Paris. Ar. 12 = F 57 

2) B. N. Paris. Ar. 16 = H 61 

3) B. X. Paris. Ar. 9 = L 70 

4) B. N. Paris Ar. 10 = M 74 

5) B. N. Paris. Ar. 11 = 7.") 

6) B. X. Paris. Ar. 18 = P 78 


1) Bodl. Libr. Laud. or. 272 = E 80 

2) Bodl. Libr. Pocock. 219 = K 82 

3) Bodl. Libr. Marsh. 440 = N 87 

4) Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424= X 89 




1) Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 = S 94 

Florentine MS. Palat. orient. 112 (XXI) = \ 95 

Variants from "Walton's Polyglot" = W 95 

2) Printed Editions Consulted and Collated 

A. Liturgical Books Edited by Tuki = T '. . 97 

List of Pentateuch Lections Occurring in the Euchologium . 98 

B. Horner's "Service for the Consecration of Church and 
Altar" = R 99 


Two Main Groups of MSS 100 

Relation between the MSS. of the First Group 101 

Relation between the MSS. of the Second Group 102 




A. Sections Marked in the MSS 106 

List of Sections Found in the First Group ("H") 107 

List of Sections from MS. B. N. Ar. 4 ("H bis") 109 

List of Sections Found in the Second Group ("AS") HI 

Table of Contents 7 


B. Lections Noted in the MSS 113 

1. List of Lections in Genesis (MSS. of I. grouij) 114 

Lections are those of the Melkite Church llo 

2. Lections in MSS. of II. grouji are those of the Coptic Churrh 115 
List of Lections in Genesis (IMSS. of II. group) 116 


The Results of this Study 117 


Note found on a Double Fly-leaf in MS. B. N. Ar. 12 119 

Last page (fol. 6"^) of the Introduction preceding Genesis in MS. 

Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424 120 




Normal Text of Group I. (MSS. H, K, L, M, N, O, P) 3* 

Normal Text of Group II. (MSS. A, B, C, D, E, F, G) 18* 

Text of MS. Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 (S) 36* 

Text of MS. Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424 (X) 50* 


This Study is founded, almost exclusively, on an extensive 
examination of manuscripts and embodies the results of in- 
vestigations made whilst pursuing my Semitic studies at the 
Catholic University of America. 

The great world-war, which broke out when the first proof- 
sheets were off the press, has delayed publication for nearly 
seven years. Yet I hope that even now this treatise will prove, 
in some small degree, a helpful contribution to the history of 
the Oriental versions of the Scriptures and that indulgence 
will be shown to its shortcomings by Semitic scholars. 

It is my pleasing duty to express my gratitude to Prof. 
Dr. H. Hyvernat, not only for the constant and manifold 
encouragement that he has given me in the preparation of 
this treatise, but also for the uniform care and kindness with 
which he directed my Semitic studies. To this eminent scholar 
I owe it that I undertook the work at all, and I have to 
thank him also for a generous loan of notes and transcripts 
of portions of the texts. 

To Prof. Dr. Pk. Coln and to Dr. A. Vaschalde I am 
indebted for many useful hints and valuable remarks in the 
class-room. To Dr. C<iLN, especially, I have to acknowledge 
my deep' obligation for much kind interest and advice during 
the progress of my study, for happy suggestions toward the 
correct reading of many difficult and almost illegible words 
and expressions in the manuscripts, and for generous assistance 
in seeing the work through the press. 

Washington, D. C. J. F. Khoue. 

Sept. 3, 192(1. 


In the first volume of the new hirger Cambridge edition ' 
of tlie Old Testament in Greek, where the "substantial variants 
foimd in the chief ancient versions made from the Septuagint" ^ 
are carefully noted, it is remarkable that no mention -whatever 
is made of the Arabic translations of the Pentateuch. This 
is all the more surj^rising as Holmes and Parsons in their 
monumental work^ had collected the different readings (speak- 
ing of the Pentateuch only) of four Arabic MSS. in the Bod- 
leian Library. 

The reason for this exclusion on the part of the modern 
editors can hardly be looked for in the opinion commonly 
admitted among scholars, though perhaps never clearly demon- 
strated, that the Arabic translation of the Septuagint is merely 
"a version of a version'" derived from the Coptic or from the 
Syro-hexaplar; for by applying this criterion the variants of 
the Ethiopic text, too, would have to be ruled out. 

We are rather inclined to believe that the learned editors 
were influenced in their course by the consciousness of the 
scanty supply of material available for critical notes, and which 
is due to the vague and imperfect knowledge we even now 
possess of the Arabic versions of the Scriptures in general, 
and in particular of those translations which represent, faith- 
fully or only approximately, the Greek version of the Old 

1 The Old Testament in Greek, edited by Allan England Brooke and 
NoKMAN McLean. Volume I. The Ootateuoh. Parts I — III, Genesis to 
Deuteronomy iuel. Cambridge 1900—1911. 

2 Prefatory note, p. I. 

' Vetus Testamentum cum variia Lectionibus. Edidit Robert Holmes. 
Tomus I. Oxonii 1798. 

12 • Introduciion 

For while the Jewish-Arabic and the Samaritan-Arabic 
Pentateuch have received considerable attention at the hands 
of Orientalists*, the C/ir(s^'aH-Arabic Pentateuch versions 
never have, as far as we know, formed the subject of scientific 
inquiry by a Semitic scholar. There are extant, it is true, a 
few essays on the Arabic version of certain books of Holy 
Writ as it is found in the Polyglots 2, as well as an important 
study on the Arabic version of the Psalms by C. Dodeelein 
(Eichhokn's Repertorium fur Biblische and Morgenliindische 

' See the ,,Literaturubersicht" given by P. Kahle in bis work "Die 
arabischen Bibelubersetzungen', Leipzig 1904. p. VllI— XII. We may 
add two articles by 0. G. Ttchses: "Cber die Quelle, aus welcher die 
Handschrift der arabischen Version in den Polyglotten geflossen ist" 
(EicHHORs's Repertorium fiir Biblische und Moi-genlandisehe Litteratur. 
Leipzig 1781, X, p. 95sqq.), and "Untersuchung, ob R. Saadjah Haggaon 
Verfasser der arabischen Ubersetzuug des Pentateuchs in den Polyglotten 
sei" (ib. XI, p. 82sqq.); also Fbiedr. Schndkrek, Dissertationes Philolo- 
gicae, tiothae 1790, p. 191—238: De Pentateucho Arabico Polyglotto; ib. 
p. 501: Additamenta ad Dissert, de Pent. Arab. Polyglotto (cfr. J. Micha- 
ELiB, Orientalisehe und Exegetische Bibliothek vol. XV, p. 02—75); Pro- 
legomena Briani Waltonii in Bibb'a I'olyglotta recognovit Dathiaiiisque et 
variorum notis suas immiscuit Fbakciscls Wrasgham, Canlabrigiae 1828, 
vol. II, p. 554 — 571. 

Then the classic dissertation on the Samaritan-Arabic Pentateuch by 
SiLVESTRE DE Sacy: "Memoire sur la Version Arabe des Livres de Moise 
a I'usage des Samaritains'". in the Memoires de TAcademie des Inscrip- 
tions et Belles-lettres, tome XLIX, Paris 1808, p. 1— 199. — Fr. Schscerer, 
tjber den Samaritanisch-Arabisolien Pentateuch, (Eichhorx's AUg. Biblio- 
thek der biblisehen Litteratur 111, p. 814—827), Ciua. van Vlotes, Spe- 
cimen philologicum versionis Samaritanae Arabicae Pentateuchi Mosaici, 
Lugduno Batavorum 1803. Andr. Christ. Hwiid, Specimen ineditae ver- 
sionis Arabicae-Samaritanae Pentateuchi. Literae accedunt Auo. Akt. 
Georgii, Eremitae Augustiniani, de variis Arabicorum versionum generi- 
bus, Romae 1780 (cfr. Michaelis, Orient, und Exeg. Biblioth. vol. XV, 
p. 978qq.) Useful infonnation on the different kinds of versions of the 
Arabic Pentateuch may be gleaned from the dissertation of H. E. G. Pad- 
Lus, Specimina Versionum Pentateuchi septem Arabicarum nondum edi- 
tarum e bibl. Oxon. Bodlejana exhibita. Jena 1789. 

2 Samcel G. Waid, L'ber die arabische Ubersetzung des Daniel in 
den Polyglotten (Eichhoen's Repertorium, XIV, p. 204 sqq.). Abuil. 
RoEDiGER, De Origine et Indole Arabicae Librorum V. T. Historieorum 
Interpretationis Libri Duo, Ualis Saxonum 1829. 

Introduction 1 3 

Litteratur, Leipzig 1777, II, p. 152sqq., and 1778, IV, p. 57sqq.); 
and, as far as the Gospels are concerned, the excellent 
monograph by I. Guidi, La Traduzione degli Evangelii in 
Arabo e in Etiopico, Roma 1888 (Atti della Reale Aca- 
demia dei Lincei, anno CCLXXXV, Serie Quarta, Vol. IV, 
pp. 5—37) 1. 

The Christian-Arabic versions of the Pentateuch, however, 
present to the student a field practically unexplored up to the 
present time. The material, in consequence, will have to be 
drawn almost exclusively from manuscript sources, and this 
circumstance naturally implies considerable limitation on the 
part of the investigator. For this reason we have restricted 
our Study to such Arabic versions of the Pentateuch as seemed 
to have been current in the CJmrch of Ejijjpt, and we may 
note in advance that on the Arabic versions used in this an- 
cient and renowned Church nothing at all has ever been pub- 
lished 2. 

Before entering on our subject it will not be amiss to 
place before the reader whatever is known or is supposed to 

' See also the general remarks on early Arabic Versions of the Bible 
by G. Graf in the first chapter of his treatise on the Christian-Arabic 
Literature up to the end of the eleventh century (Die christlich-arabische 
Literatur bis zur frankischen Zeit, Freiburg im Breisgau IfK).")) ; H. Goussen's 
essay on the Christian-Arabic Literature of the Mozarabs (Die cbristlich- 
arabische Literatur der Mozaraber, Leipzig 1909; the same author an- 
nounced an essay on the "Copto-Ai-abio Literature'', which, however, has 
not yet appeared); and the instructive essay by Chr. Fb. Schnurree, 
Locus de UtUitate Linguae Arabicae ad Critioam Veteris Testament! 
exemplis illustratus, Orationum Academicarum Delectus Postunius, Tu- 
bingae 18ii8, p. 245—254. 

' G. Graf, op. cit. p. 6 — 24, speaks of a Palestinian, Syrian and 
Spanish (Magribian) early Christian Arabic literature; the Egyptian he 
excludes from his sketch as being of too recent date: "Aus dem Bereiche 
der koptischen Sprache gind uns, soviel bis jetzt bekannt, keine arabischen 
Ubersetzungen aus der Zeit bis zum 10. und 11. Jahrhundert Uberkommen" 
(p. 7). Even C. Brockelmann has not a word to say about the Egyptian- 
Arabic versions in his History of Christian-Arabic Literature (Geschichte 
der ohristlichen Litteraturen des Orients, 2. Ausgabe, Leipzig 1909, p. 67 
his 74, Die christlich-arabische Literatur. 

1 4 LUroJitction 

be known of the genesis of the Arabic versions in general and 
to acquaint him briefly with the many ditticult problems which 
confront the scholar in his investigation as to the origin, age 
and natuie of the Arabic versions of the Bible in Egypt. 

The history of the Arabic Bible is essentially the histoiy 
of the versions made for the use of the native population of 
the Christian regions of Asia and Africa that were overrun 
and subdued by the Mohammedan hordes about the middle 
of the seventh century. As Christianity had admittedly gained 
a firm foothold in Arabia ' in the latter part of the fourth 
century, we may safely assume that in the first centuries parts 
of the Bible, more especially the Gospels, must have been 
translated into the vernacular of the inhabitants of the Arabian 
peninsula. Still there is no positive proof of the existence of 
any version of the Bible in Arabic anterior to or contemporary 
with the rise of the Mohammedan religion at the beginning of 
the seventh century of our era. 

When under the first caliphs Syria was conquered (Abu 
Bekr's army taking Damascus in G35), Palestine subdued (Omar 
capturing Jerusalem in 638), Egypt made tributary (Alexandria 
opening her gates in 641), the northern coast of Africa 
devastated by the Moslem forces, and finally in 711 even the 
powerful kingdom of the Visigoths in Spa'ia overthrown by 
the relentless onslaught of Islam, then it was that the language 
of the conquerors, too, gradually encroached upon the native 
tongue of the subjugated nations. Palestinian Aramaic, Syriac, 
Coptic and other less important languages waned and even- 
tually, though only after several centuries, entirely disappeared 
before the ever growing influence and importance of the lan- 
guage of the Koran. This process of eliminating the old and 
substituting the new- vernacular seems to have taken place 
faster m Palestine and Syria, owing to the greater affinity 
between the Ajrabic and the Aramaic dialects; in fact, about 

' J. Wkli.hausbk, Rest* arabischen Heidentums, U. Ausgabe, Berlin 
1897, p. 231—234. Compare also Act. Apost. 2, 11. 

Introduction 15 

the year 800 Arabic i was the language universally spoken in 
the territory of the Aramaic tongue 2. 

But what was the fate of the Arabic language in the 
valley of the Nile? what its influence upon the subjugated 
Christian population of Egypt? Did the Arabic idiom entirely 
supersede the vernacular Egyptian dialects there also? And 
if so, did the Coptic give way to the Arabic at an early date 
or only after many centuries of persistent struggle? Did the 
Christians soon feel the necessity of translating their Sacred 
Books into the language of their new masters, and at what 
time precisely did they set about to meet this demand? Was 
there an official Arabic version of the Bible in the Church 
of Egypt, or were there several authoritatively recognized 
translations, or perhaps only private attempts to bring the 
contents of the Scriptures home to the intelligence of the 
common people? All these are questions which have not yet 
been definitely answered. For some of them a solution is 
offered devoid for the most part of any scientific value; for 
others an attempt at a satisfactory solution has not even been 
made, owing, perhaps, to the vague and groundless opinion so 
widely prevalent in almost all text-books on Introduction to 
the Study of the Bible and in not a few encyclopedia articles 
on the versions of the Old and New Testament, that the 
Arabic versions, being of rather late origin, are of no import- 
ance whatever for textual criticism and that their value for 

1 Graf, op. cit. p. 7. 

' GuiDi, in Lis article on the Arabic versions of the Gospels referred 
to above, holds that the oldest Arabic version (from the Greek) was made 
in Palestine, soon after the Arabian concjuest, at the monastery of St. 
Sabbas near Jerusalem. — ■ Yet, as to the liturgical language, Cyril Cha- 
HOK, Histoire des Patriarcats Melkites, Rome 1909, tome III, p. 29 — 41, 
proves on the authority of a large number of MSS. that the Melkites 
of Syria for the most part used Syriac in their services from the 10th 
to the 16 th century. Then only did they adopt Arabic as liturgical 
language. — Compare also the unpublished treatise of E. Renaudot: "De 
I'antiquitc des versions syriaque, arabc, ethiopienne de la Bible" preserved 
in the Bibliotheque Nationale, MS. Collect. Renaudot, vol. I, fol. 260—270. 

16 Introduction 

the scientific study of the Scriptures is practically nought. 
Thus, e. g., Cheyne and Black devote just ten lines to the 
Arabic versions of the Old Testament in the vol. IV of their 
Encyclopaedia Biblica. Few and meagre, too, are the notes 
on the Arabic versions by A. J. Maas in his article on the 
Versions of the Bible in the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XV, 
pp.367 — 377. — Excellent monographs on the Arabic versions 
have been written by E. Nestle in the "Kealencyklopiidie fiir 
protestantische Theologie und Kirche"', Dritte Auflage, vol. Ill, 
p. 90 — 95 (in condensed form Xes-tle's article is found in 
"The New ScHAFi'-HERZot; Encyclopedia of Religious Know- 
ledge", Funk and Wagnalls publishers, New York, vol. Ill, 
p. 134 — 13.5); by F. C. Buekitx in Hastings Dictionary of the 
Bible, vol. I. p. 136 — 138; and by H. Ht\-eenat in the Dic- 
tionnaire de la Bible, vol. I, col. 815 — 856. 

These articles, though they present exhaustive reviews ot 
what is actually known as to the origin and uature, the 
manuscripts and printed editions of the Arabic Bible, also 
reveal the fact that we really know but very little of the 
question of the Arabic versions viewed in the light of present 
day scientific research '. 

The modern editions of the Arabic Bible by the Dominican 
Fathers, in 4 vols. (Mossul 1875 — 1878) and by the Jesuits, 
in 3 vols. (Beyrout, 1876 — 1885), both representing the text 
of the Vulgate (though they are probably based upon a fair 
amount of ancient manuscript material and are of acknowledged 
merit for correctness of diction and elegance of style), and 
the Protestant edition of Smith-van Dyck (Beyrout 1860 — 1865), 
justly praised for its simple language and popular tone, cannot, 
it is plain, be of great use for textual criticism; neither can 
the Propaganda edition of 1671 according to the Vulgate and 

' Treatises like the one found in Le Loko's Bibliotheca Sacra (con- 
tinuata ab Akdkea (iottlieb Mascb. Halac 1781, II vol. p. 103 — 139) and 
in Eichhorn's Eiiileitung' in das Alte Testament, (iottiiigon 1823, II. Hand, 
p. 230—319, are too antiquated to be of any actual value except for occa- 
sional reference. 

Introduction 1 7 

the revised edition by Tuki in 1752 serve such a purpose, nor 
the text of the Paris (1645) and Jjondon (1657) Polyglots', 
nor the numerous reprints oi' these editions, in whole or in 
part, made for liturgical use- or for missionary purposes. 

There can, however, hardly be any doubt that between the 
eighth century and the thirteenth numerous Arabic versions 
of the Scriptures must have been used in the dift'erent count- 
ries of the migthy Mohammedan Caliphate 3, and that among 

1 The first Polj'glot edited by Cardinal Ximenez in 1515 did not 
comprise the Arabic version; neither did the one published at Antwerp 
in 1571, the so-called "Regia". The Paris Heptaglot appearing in 1645 
under the auspices of Mich, i.e Jay contained the Old and the Xew 
Testament in Arabic edited by Gaurikl Sio^ita ,,from au Kgyptiau original 
of the 14th century" (Praef. ad Walt. Polyglot, p. 4). What authority 
attaches to this statement, it is difficult to say. Generally, however, it 
is admitted that the Arabic Pentateuch of this Polyglot is substantially 
the same as that attributed to Saadias Gaon, a native of El Fayoum in 
Egypt, rector of the Jewish Academy at Sora, Babylonia, about the year 
930 A. D., which version was first issued in print, in Hebrew characters, 
in the so-called Constantinopolitan Polyglot (i. e. the Pentateuch in 
Hebrew, Chaldoe, Persian and Arabic) in the year 15 Ifj.—Tlie other books 
of the Paris' Polyglot are translated partly from the Greek, partly from 
the Syriac, and present an odd medley of heterogeneous versions made 
at different times by different authors from diverse sources (see Roedigbk, 
De Origine et Indole Arabicae Libr. V. T. Historicorum Interpretationis, 
cited above). Walton's Polyglot printed at Loudon in 1057 contains the 
Arabic text of the l^aris Polyglot with emendations and additions taken 
from Bodleian MSS. (Praef. ad Walton, I'olygl. p. 5, n. 16). 

2 The pericopes of the Old and New Testament found in the ancient 
liturgical books of the Oriental Churches that now use Arabic in the 
liturgy are certainly of the gi'eatest importance for the study of the 
early Arabic versions. But in printed editions we must always take care 
to determine whether we really have an old text before us or some later 
recension; and for the most jiart we shall also have to draw for these 
liturgical texts on manuscript material. 

3 Perhaps the opinion of Doderlein is somewhat 'exaggerated when 
he applies to the Arabic versions what St. Augustine (Doctr. christ. II. 
11. 14. 15) wrote of the Latin translations of the Bible at his time: ''Qui 
Scripturas ex hebraca lingua in graecam verterunt, numerari possunt; 
latini autem intcrprotes nullo modo: ut cnim cuivis in manus venit codex 
graecus et alinuantulum facultatis sibi utriusque linguae habere videbatur 
ausus est interpretari" (Eichhorn's Repertorium II, p. 151). 

Khodb, Arabic Pentateuch in tlie Cliurcb of Egypt. 2 

1 8 Introduction 

these there are some that are not only venerable for anti- 
(juity, but also consecrated by long standing use in the Li- 

To return to the Church of Egypt ', it is indeed extremely 
diflBcult to fix with any degree of certainty the time when the 
8acred Scriptures were first translated into the idiom of the 
Arabic conquerors. Scholars are by no means agreed even as 
to the exact date of the origin of the Coptic versions; and as 
the MSS. that have come down to us are comparatively few^ 
and not of very great antiquity, the precise facts as to the 
beginnings of the Coptic version will perhaps never be defin- 
itely ascertained. From the time of St. Mark, Greek had 
been the official language of the Church of Alexandria: the 
Scriptures and the Liturgy were writteu in Greek. In course 
of time, however, these sacred books, or at least parts of 
them, were translated into the difierent Coptic dialects, chieHy 
into the Sahidic in the South and into the Bohairic in the 
Delta region and in the desert of .Nitria. But instead of 

• For information on the origin and the early lU'voloimieut of the 
Cliureh in Egypt see the article on the Church cf Alesandria (s. v. Ale- 
xandria) by J. K. Woods in the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I, pp. 300— .302; 
also vol. X, pp. 1.57 — 161 (s. v. Melchites) a summary of the History of 
the Melkite Church by A. Fortescoe; and for the Coptic Church the 
scholarly treatise on Egypt by H. Hvvernat in the same Encyclojiodia, 
vol. V, pp. 329-363, especially sect. V (pp. 350— 35ti) The Coptic Church, 
sect. VI (i>p. 3.^^>— 362) Coptic Literature, sect. Vll (p. 362— 363) Copto- 
Arabic Literature. As these articles show, the terms "Copt" and "Coptic" 
are used by some to designate the Monophysites or Jacobites of Egypt, 
by others as an equivalent for the native Egyptians in general (as 
distinguished from the Greek and Roman colonists). Although the latter 
use is etymologically correct (Copt=kibf or kubt in Arabic, a corruption 
and adaptation of the Cireek AiyintTtoi), we shall employ the term in its 
historical more restricted sense and distinguish consistently two branches 
of the "Church of Kgypt", ^iz. the Melkites and the Copts. In fact, the' 
Jacobite I'atriarch (residing in Alexandria and later in Old Cairo) laid 
claim to jurisdiction overall the -Coptic" Christians of Egypt, Abyssinia, 
Nubia and Barbary (J. M. Woods, 1. c.). 

2 See the interesting article by H. Htvermat: "Pounjuoi les ancicnnes 
collections de manuscrits Coptes sont si pauvres", Kevuc Ijiblique (N. S. 
tome X) 1913, pp. 422—428. 

Jnlroihtcdon 19 

venturing to determine the century when the different versions 
originated ', it is no doubt better to adopt the jjrudent reserve 
ot'H. Htvernat (in his article cited above, p. 18, n. 2) and be 
contented for the time being witli the general statements, that 
the translating of the sacred and the liturgical books into the 
Coptic dialects took place gradually in the first centuries of 
the Christian era "according to the needs and circumstances 
of place and time", and that the Coptic period of the Litera- 
ture of the Church of Egypt extends from about the sixth or 
seventh to the eleventh or twelfth century respectively. 

In like manner we consider it a most delicate task to 
say with any degree of certainty, precisely when the Arabic 
versions came into vogue in the Church of Egypt. The sources 
from which to derive explicit information are too scarce, 
especially since the MSS. of the monasteries and churches of 
Egypt were so ill preserved, nay even suffered to go to ruin 
by the owners with unpardonable neglect 2. Evidently there 
can be no question of Egyptian Arabic versions prior to the 
subjugation of the country by the followers of the Prophet 
from Arabic in the seventh century. But it would seem not 
at all improbable that in the ninth century, perhaps even in 
the eighth, Arabic versions of the Scriptures, at least ot cer- 

1 J. Leipoldt, Geschichte der koptischen Litteratur (iu Geschichte 
der christlichen Litteratureu des Orients, II. Auflage, Leipzig 1909) p. 139, 
assigns the Sahidio version to the third or fourth century and the Bo- 
hairic to the sixth or seventh. A. J. Maas in his article on the Versions 
(mentioned above, pag. 16) writes ol' the Coptic versions (first section, 
n. 2): "It is generally admitted that some of the versions, if not all, date 
back to the second century". Compare also Etienne QuAXKKMEnE, Re- 
cherches Criti(iues ct Historiques sur la Langue et la Litterature de 
I'Egypte, Paris 1808, pp. 1 — 44; and H. Hvvernat, Etude sur les versions 
coptes de la Bible, in the Revue Biblique (.July — October 1896 and Jan. 
1897), and the article "Coptic Versions of the Bible" by the same author 
in The Catliolic Encycl; vol. XVI, pp. 78—80. 

2 See H. Hvveknat, Fuurquoi les ancieunes collections etc., cited 
above, p. 18, n. 2. We think we are justified in extending to other MSS. 
of the monastery and church libraries what the author asserts explicitly 
with regard to the Coptic BISS. only. 


20 IiUroduction 

tain books, should have originated in Egypt, though the question 
is exceedingly obscure and so far entirely unsolved. A plaus- 
ible theory for its solution may porhaps be derived from a 
careful consideration of the history of the Church of Alex- 
andria and of the "needs and circumstances of place and time" 
under which such versions must have come into use. ' 

Under the Patriarch Dioscurus (444—451) the Church of 
Alexandria became unfortunately embroiled in the Monophysite 
heresy. At the Council of Chalcedon (451) Dioscurus was 
deposed and banished; but the newly elected orthodox (Catholic) 
Patriarch was murdered (in 457) by the populace and an 
open schism ensued, giving rise to two permanent parties: the 
orthodox or Catholic party, which clung to the Church of 
Constantinople in their religious tenets and became known 
eventually as ^lelkites or Royalists (i. e. adherents of the 
Emperor) because they remained faithful to the decisions of 
the Council of Chalcedon, which had been declared by Em- 
peror Marcian the law the Eiupire (whence also "Chalce- 
donians") and the Monophysitos (or Jacobites) who formed 
the large majority of the native population, constituting in 
fact a National Church, and who, therefore, became known 
after the Arab invasion simply as Kubt (i. e. Egyptians) or 
Copts. Both parties used the same Liturgy, that of St. Mark; 
but the contrast betwesu Monophysites and Melkites was ex- 
pressed in their language: whereas the Monophysites spoke 
the national language of the country, the Coptic, and adopted 
it in the Liturgy (just as the Monophysites in Syria and 
Palestine used Syriac); the Melkites, who for the most part 
were foreigners, settlers, merchants and officials sent out from 

' Compare the articles quoted p. 18, u. 1 ; moreover: Stanlev Lane- 
Fools, A History of Egypt in tlie Mi<ldli> Ages, London lilOL especially 
pp. 2—8, 27sqq.; Fowlek, Christian Egypt, London 1902; Becker, Bei- 
trage zur (ioschichte .\gypten8 unter dcm Islam, StralJliurg 1903; Reite- 
HETER, Beschreibung Agyptens in\ Mittelaltor, Leipzig 1903; Fit. Kavseu 
und E. RoLOi'F, Agyplen einsl und jetzt, Freiburg 1908 (especially 
pp. 196—198 and 292—314); A. Fortescue, The Lesser Eastern Churches, 
London 1913. 

Introduction 21 

Constantinople, with only a small fraction of the native po- 
pulation, retained the Greek. 

When, however, in the seventh century the Mohammedans 
had made themselves masters of the country, the relation of 
the Melkite Church of Egypt with the Church of the Empire 
was more and more checked, in fact paralyzed and hefore 
long was cempletely severed, whilst the language of the con- 
querors (though at first no repressive measures had been used 
against the vernacular) was with the beginning of the eighth 
century forced upon the subjugated people i. Is it then sur- 
prising, or is it not rather a natural consequence, that the 
Melkite Branch of the Church of Egypt, which had no ver- 
nacular liturgical language to form a barrier, as it were, against 
the encroachments of the new idiom, should have adopted at 
an early date the language of every-day life, the Arabic, even 
in the Liturgy P^ 

In the Jacobite Branch of the Church of Egypt, however, 
matters probably took a somewhat different turn. The cry 
of "the faith of Cyril, one nature in Christ, no betrayal of 
Ephesus" really meant "no submission to the foreign tyrant 
at the Bosporus". And hence this National Church, owing' 
to its animosity towards the Church of the Empire, had adopted 
as its liturgical language the current Egyptian vernacular long 
before the Arab invasion, earlier most likely in Upper Egj'pt, 
where the Sahidic was the principal dialect, but also in Lower 
Egypt, where the Bohairic dialect prevailed. The Copts were 
at first favored by the Arab conquerors, because they had 
been the abettors and auxiliaries of the Mohammedans against 
the Graeco-Roman domination, and their national language 
was not ostracized from public documents in the first century 
after the invasion; later, however, repressive nLeasures were 

' Lane-Poole, 1. c. p. 27: „Governor Abdallab (A. D. 705) ordered 
Arabic to be used in all public documents, instead of Coptic as here- 

2 Cyril Charon, Histoire des Patriarcata Melkites, Rome 1909, tome 
III, p. 137sqii. 

22 Introduction 

put in force. Nevertheless the Coptic, so intimately interwoven 
with the life of the people, continued to hold its own for a 
long time, especially as the language of literature and of the 
liturgy. In fact, it is precisely because the liturgical language 
of the Coptic Church was the native tongue aud for a long 
time the every-day language of the people ' (and not merely 
the language of the liturgy, as the Greek was for the Egyptian 
Melkites) that in the Coptic Branch of the Church of Egypt 
the Arabic found admission into the liturgy at a comparatively 
late period, probably not before the tenth century, and then 
only in the form of -lections" or readings from the Old and 
the New Testament. 

Yet it could hardly be otherwise than tiiat the language 
of the conquerors, the Arabic, owing to common intercourse 
should have steadily gained ground on the Coptic in every- 
day life; and especially when, from the eighth century onwards, 
the Jacobites, were likewise subjected to incessant oppressions 
from the new masters and the Coptic tongue was banned from 
public life and official documents ^ it was a necessary con- 
sequence that before long the people understood Arabic better 
than Coptic, that Arabic became the universally spoken idiom, 
the "new vernacular", and tliat the "old vernacular" Coptic 
was doomed to a slow but certain decline. 

As a result Arabic versions of the Bible, especially of the 
more frequently used parts of the same, became a desideratum 
at first with the ordinary classes of the people and gradually 
with the higher and educated classes also. And this is the 
reason why we deem it not at all improbable that private or 
unofficial versions of portious of the Sacred Scripture may 
have begun to circulate among the Copts in Egypt from the 
ninth century perhaps a hundred years or more before they 
were gi'anted official recognition in the Liturgy alongside of 

■ All the more so since the Boliairic, the language of the Jacobite 
Patriarch, gradually gained predominance over the .Sahidic and other 
dialects and became practically the vernacular of all the Copts. 

2 Compare above, p. 21, n. 1. 

Introduction ' 23 

the Coptic, which declined more and more, until by the four- 
teenth or fifteenth century it was reduced to a merely liturg- 
ical "dead" language, practically unknown even to the cultured 
classes of the Egyptians. 

Be it rememhered, however, that all this, plausible as it 
may appear, is only a theory, — an attempt at a satisfactory 
explanation in default of positive arguments that could settle 
the question definitely. Whatever may have been the real 
facts as to the use of Arabic versions of the Scriptures in the 
two Branches of the Church of Egypt, — if the facts are 
ever ascertained, — the question will have to be decided from 
a study of manuscript sources: manuscripts of th(^ Bible 
proper, manuscripts of liturgical books with their numerous 
pericopes of Holy Writ, and manuscripts of collections of 
canons, wherein scriptural passages are frequently quoted. Re- 
stricting ourselves, then, for reasons already stated to the 
Pentateuch only (of which we have, moreover, a greater number 
of MSS. than of any other books of the Old Testament, ex- 
cepting, perhaps, the Psalms) we shall endeavor in this disser- 
tation to put before the reader the general results of our 
study of a large number of representative Egyptian Mss. of 
the Arabic Pentateuch, without, however, entering for the pre- 
sent into a detailed discussion of all the obscure and inter- 
esting questions referred to above as to the age, the origin, 
the nature and the mutual relation of the Araliic Versions 
of the Pentateucii in the Church of Egypt. 






A. Wlieii there is question of fiuding Arabic manuscripts 
of Egyptian origin, we naturally first turn to those MSS. which 
contain an Arabic and a Coptic text arranged in parallel 
columns on the same page, or in which there is sometimes an 
Arabic text written in miniature characters on the margin 
beside the Coptic text. As Coptic was never used outside of 
Egyi)t, the Egyptian origin of the aforesaid iMSS. in practically 
establislied beyond doubt. 

Of these bilingual MSS. we have found nine that contain 
the Pentateuch, in whole or in part, and we have arranged 
them according to their age as indicated in tlie catalogues. 
The date of the MSS. refers directly to the Coptic text only, 
as in at least one instance (Vatic. Copt. 1), the Arabic text 
was evidently added later. , 

1) Vatic. Copt. 1, 10th cent. (Pent.) Mai", Script. Vet. V, 
part. 2, p. 114. 

2) Vatic. Copt. 2—4, 14th cent. (Pent.) 2 Mai, Script. Vet. V, 
part. 2, p. 115—117. 

3) B. N. Paris. Copt. 1, 1300 (Pent.) Chabot^, Invent., p. 6. 

4) Brit. Mus. or. 422, 1393 (Pent.) Ckum^, Cat. B. M. p. 315, 
n. 712. 

1 Scriptorum Veterum Nova Collectio e Vaticanis Codieibus. Edita 
ab Ahqelo Majo. Romae 1831. Tom V, part. 2. See below, chap. II, 1. 

2 See below, chap. II, 2. 

3 J. B. Chabot, Inventaire Somraaire des Manuscrits Copies do la 
Bibliothique Nationale. Paris 1906. See below, Obap. II, 3. 

■' W. B. (Jrum, Catalogue of the Coptic MSS. in the British Museum. 
London 1905. See below, chap. II, 5. 

28 General notice on the Mamtscripts of the Arabic Pentateuch 

6) Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 33, 1674 (Pent.) Ubi«, Copt. 1, p. 318. 

6) B. 2s. Paris. Copt. '^7 1676 (Gen., Exod.) Chabot, In- 
vent., p. 13. 

7) Bibl. Angelica, Rome, Copt. 4, date? (Genesis) Guidi^ 
Cataloghi, p. 78. 

8) Leyden Ci>d. 1507, 17r)8 (Levit.) de Goe-ie^, Cat V., 
p. 77, n. 2366. 

9) B. N.Paris. Copt. 100, 1835 (Pent.) Chabot, Invent, p. 16. 
The Coptic in these MSS. is in the Bohairic dialect; for, 

by the time that Arabic was so much in vogue that these 
bilingual MSS. l)ecame a necessity for divine service, as ex- 
plained above, the Bohairic had replaced nearly all other 
Egyptian dialects and was practically the vernacular, and cer- 
tainly the liturgical language, of all the Copts. 

Of the Arabic text of these double ]\ISS. nothing has ever 
been published. As to the Coptic <: 

a) The text of MS. Bodl. Libr. Hunt 33 was edited by 
David Wii.kins in his "Coptic Pentateuch", Loudon 1731. 

b) MS. Brit. Mus. or. 422 (Tattam) was utilized (besides 
the edition of Wilkiks) l)y Paul de Lacjarde, "Der 
Pentateuch Kojjtisch", Leipzig 1867. 

c) The throe MSS. (1, 57, 100) of the Paris Natiiuial 
Library were probably all used by Pallet "La version 
Cophte du Peutateuque", Paris 1854; but as he pub- 
lished only the first 27 chapters of Genesis without any 
introduction or even a key to the abl)reviation marks 
he employed, his edition is practically useless. 

' J. Uri, Bililiotbecae BotUeiaime Oodicum Mauuscriptorum Orieii- 
talium Catalogus. I'ars I'rima. (>.\ouii 1787. See below, chaji. II, 4. 

2 I. GuiDi, C'ataloghi dei Codici Orieiitali dei alcuue BibliotecLe 
d'ltalia. Firenze 1878. The MS. here mentioned couUins 47 chapters 
in Coptic, and 7 chapters only in Arabic. 

3 M. J. DE GoEjE, Catalogus Codicum Orientalium Bibliothecae Aca- 
demiac Lugduuo-Batarae, vol. V. Lugduno-Batavoruiii 1893. 

* Cfr. JI. IIyvernat, Etude sur lus Versions Copies de la Bible (Ex- 
trait de la Revue Bibhque, July, Oct. 1896, Jan. 1897), p. 38sqq. 

Part I, Chap. I 29 

Briefly, then, we may say that the Copto- Arabic MSS. of 
the Pentateuch have not been utilized for publication, except 
Hunt. 33 and Brit. Mus. or. 422 with regard to the Coptic 
text only. 

B. Passing from these bilingual MSS. to those that contain 
merely the Arabic text, the question of determining their 
Egyptian origin becomes far more difficult, the reason being 
that statements or notes concerning origin ("i)rovenance") arc, 
on the whole, but rarely found in these MSS.; and where an 
attempt at "placing" a MS. is made by the cataloguer, the 
indication is, as our own experience has proved, not unfre- 
quently misleading. We do not presume, therefore, to give a 
list of Egyptian Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch; we do not 
even wish to classify as Egyptian all the MSS. which, guided 
by the sparse notes of the catalogues and occasional remarks 
of different writers, we have selected for our study on the 
Arabic Versions of the Pentateuch in the Churcli of Egypt; 
we refer the reader instead to the following chapters, where- 
in the nature and probable origin of each of these MSS. is 
fully discussed. 

Nevertheless it may not be out of place to give a fairly 
complete list of the more important MSS. of the Arabic Pen- 
tateuch in general, as they are found in tiie different libraries 
of Europe', and to indicate briefly on the authority of the 
catalogues which we consulted for this compilation, their 
pi'obable age and the original which the version represents. 
We shall also indicate, to the best of our knowledge, when 
and by whom any of these MSS. have been utilized for 

1 A. catalogue of the Arabic MSS. of the .Jesuit University at Beyrout, 
Syria, appeared in the Al-Machriq (Revue catholique orientale bimensuelle, 
Beyrouth), vol. VII, 1904. On pp. 3:5— ;»8 there is described a manuscript 
(MS. 1) dated 1690 and certaiuing the greater part of the O. T. The 
Pentateuch, of which some specimens are given, extends from page 1 
to 2;J1. 


Gentral nolitr nu the Manusrriptx of the Arahic Fentateuch 

a) In the Florentine Library'. 

Cod. Palat. orient. VII, Genesis and Exodus, Peshitto — 

Cod. Palat. orient XII, Pentateuch Hebrew 

Cod. Palat. orient. XV, Genesis Septuag. — 

Cod. Palat orient. XXI •■'.Pentateuch Peshitto 1245 

b) In the Vatican Library s. 

Vat. Ar. 1 Pentateuch Syriac, Septuag. 1329 

Vat. Ar. II Pentateuch Septuagint^ 14th cent 

VatAr. CDLXV Pentateuch (Maronite) 17 th cent 

Vat Ar. CDLX VIII Old Test. (Mekhite) 1579 

VatAr. DXXV Pentateuch — 17 th cent 

Vat. Ar. DCV Pentateuch Syriac 1464 

Vat Aa-. DC VI Pentateudi (Coptic) 1344 

c) In the Royal Library at Berlin ^ 
Xo. 10172 Pentateuch Syriac (?) 1280 

d) In the Imperial Library at Vienna o. 
Xo. 1.541 Pentateuch Hebrew — 

e) In the Royal State Library at Munich'. 
Cod. ar. 234 (or. 40) Pentateuch Syriac (?) 1492 

Cod. ar. 233 (or. 34) Genesis Hebrew 16th cent. 

' Steph. Evod. AssEM.\m:s, Bibliothecae Laurentianae et Palatinae 
Codicum MSS. Orientalium "Catalogus. Florentiuae 1747. 

2 First four chapters of Genesis pul)lished liy P. Kahlk. Die ara- 
bischen Bibelubersetzungen V, p. 13—23. See below, chap. V, 1. - 

' Script. Vet. nova Collectio e Vaticanis Codicibus edita ab Anqelo 
Mud. Romae 1831. Tom. IV. part. 2. 

'■ See below, chap. V, 1. 

■■• W. Ahlwarut, Verzeichiiis der arab. HSS. der ki'inigl. Bibliothek 
in Berlin, 10 vols.. Berlin 18«7— 1899. vol IX. 

6 G. Flugel, Die Araliischen, I'ersischen und Tiirkischeii Hand- 
schriften der Koniglichen Hofbibliothek zu Wien. 3 vols. Wien 1867, 
vol. III. 

' Joseph Aojieb, Die arabischen Hdss. der K. Hof- und Staatsbiblio- 
thek in Munchen. Miinchea 18»j(i. See also Orai-, C'hristlii-h-arabische 
Literatur, p. 25, 

rarl I, Cluip. 1 31 

t) In the Library of the Leyden Academy '. 

Cod. 236 Scaliger (n. 2361)' Hebrew — 

Cod. 215 Scaliger (n. 2362) Hebrew(?) — . 

Cod. 1222 Schultens. (n. 2363)3 Samaritan — 

Cod. 230 Scaliger (n. 2364) ^ (Carshunic) 1.528 

Cod. 377 Warner (n. 2365)^ Hebrew-Syriac 1240 

g) In the British Museum 's. 

7204 Rich Pentateuch "Catena" (Carshunic) - 

Harl. .^475 (I) Pentateuch — Uthcent. 

Harl. 5506 (II) Genesis Hebrew 17 th cent. 

Add.ll855(XVl[I) Pentateuch Hebrew(?) 13thcent. 

h) In the Bodleian Library, Oxford '. 

Hunt. 84 (IJri, Syr. XXVII) Pentateuch "Catena" Carsh. — 
Marsh 175 (Uri, Syr. XXIX) Pentateuch "Catena" Carsh. — 
Bodl.Arch.D.51 (Dri, Syr. XXVIII) Pent. "Catena" Carsh 8. — 
Hunt. 112 (Uri, Syr. XXX) Gen., Exod., Levit., "Cat." Carsh s. — 
Marsh. 440 (Uri, Syr. XXVI) 9 Gen., Exod., "Catena" Carsh 8. _ 
Pocock. 348 (Uri, Hebr. XIII) Gen., Exod., Hebrew — 
Pocock. 396 (Uri, Hebr. XIV) Levit, Numb, Deut., Hebrew — 

' M. J. DE GoEjE, Catalog. Cod. Orient. V, cited above. 

- Published by Erpenids, Pentateiichus Mosis arabice, Leiden 1622. 

3 Published by AuR. Kuenen, Arabica versio Peutateuchi Samaritan;i. 
I.eiden 18.54. 

* Genesis only published by De Lagakde, "Materialien zur Geschichtc 
und Kritik des Pentateuehs II", Leipzig 1867. 

5 Published by De Laoarde, "Materialien zur Geschichte und Kritik 
des Pentateuehs I", Leipzig 1867. 

8 GuL. Cureton, Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum Orientaliuui 
ipiae in Museo Britannieo asservantur. Pars prima codiees Syriacos et 
Carshunicos eoniplectens. Pars secunda codices Arabicos complectens. 
Londiiii 184(5. 

' L'ri's Catalogue cited above. Als,o the continuation of the same in 
two volumes: Partis secundae volunien primum cont'ocit Ai.ex. Nicoll, 
Oxonii 1821. Partis secundae volunien secundum cdidit E. B. Posey, 
Oxonii 1835. 

8 See Pdsev, p. 444. 9 See below, chap. IV, 3. 

."^2 Oentral notice on Uie Jleuiuscripts of the Arabic Pnifnteurh 

Hunt. 52.? (Uri. Hebr. XLVI) Pentateuch Hel)iew 1317 
Hunt. 460 (Uri. Hebr. L) Pentateuch Hebrew — 

Lauil. or. 272 (Uri, Ar. Christ. I) Pent. Hebrew-Samar. ' 1347 
Laud. or. 243 (Uri, Ar. Christ. 11)2 Pent. Septuag. — 
Laud. or. 258 (Uri, Ar. Christ. Ill) « Pent. Sei)tuag. — 
Pocuck.21!>(Uri.Ar. Christ. IV) * Pent. Syriac? (Pusey, p. 444) — 
Seld. 66 (Uri. Ar. Christ. VII) Pent. Peshitto (Pusey. p. 444) — 
Hunt.424(Uri,Ar.Christ.VIII)*Pent.Hebre\v(Pusey,l.c.,Syr.) — 
Hunt. 186 (Uri, Ar. Christ. IX) Pent. — (Pusey. I.e., Syr.) — 
Bodl. 345 (NicoU. p. 1) Pent. Samarit. 1480 

Bodl. 296 (Nicoll, p. 10) Pent. ' — 1344 

Bodl. 324 (Pusey, p. 444) fi Pent. "Catena" (Carsh.) 1579- 

i) In the National Library at Paris '. 
B. N. ar. 1 (Anc. fonds !)« Old Test. Hebr. (Pent.) 1583 

B. X. ar. 4 (Anc. fonds 3)» Pent Samarit.(?) 13th cent. 

B. N. ar. 5 (Anc. fonds 2) '" Pent. Samar.-Syr. 15th cent. 
B. N. ar. 6 (Anc. fonds 4) '» Pent. Samarit. 1432 8 (Anc. fonds 12)1" Pgnt. Samarit. 16th cent. 
B. X. ar. 9 (Supplement 3) ' ' Pent. Septuag. 1283 

' Cited by Holmes and Parsons "Vetus Test, Graecum" in the vari- 
ants to the Pentateuch as Arab. 3. See below, chapt. IV, 1. 

2 Cited by Holmes and "Vet. Test. Graec." as Arab. 1; also 
by Fr. Field '-Origenis Hexaploruni quae supersunt", Oxouii 1875, as 
Arab. 1. 

3 Cited by Holmes and Parsons as Arab. 2; also by Field. 
* See below, chap. IV, 2. 

5 Cited by Holmes and Parsons as Arab. 4. See below, chap. IV, 4. 

6 See below, chap. IV, 2. 

' M. DE Slane, Catalogue des manuscrits arabes de la Bibliothdque 
Xationale. I'aris 1883 — 1887. And: H. Zoxesberg, Catalogue des manu- 
scrits syriaques et sabeeus de la Bibliotheijue Nationale, Paris 1874. 

8 Pentateuch said to be the version of Saadias. Published in the 
Paris (and London) Polyglot, 

3 See below, chap. Ill, 2. Also App. II. 

'" Described and numerous specimens thereof published by de Sacv, 
in his famous 'Memoire" on the Samaritan-Arabic version cited above. 

<• See below, chap. Ill, 3. 

Fart I, Chap. I 33 10 (Supplement 5)' Pent. Septuag. 1330 11 (Supplement 4)^ Pent. Septuag. 1331 

B. N. ar. 12 (Suppl. 3 bis) 3 Pent. Septuag. 1353 

B. N. ar. 13 (Anc. fonds 10) Pent. Septuag. 15th cent. 

B. N. ar. 14 (Aiic. fonds .5) Pent. Septuag. 16 th cent. 

B. N. ar. 15 (Anc. fonds 11) Pent. Septuag. 11 th cent. 16 (Anc.fonds5A)^ Pent. — 1238 17 (Anc. fonds 6) Pent. Peshitto 1661 

B. N. ar. 18 (Anc. fonds 7) -'Genesis Peshitto (?) — 

B. N. ar. 21 (Suppl. 6) Genesis "Catena"' Peshitto(?) 1597 

B.N. syr.lO (Anc. fonds 4) Gen., Exod. "Catena" Peshitto — 

We have omitted from our list a number of MSS. which 
are merely modern copies — made, as a rule, by European 
writers — of older MSS. Wliile it may be that some MSS. 
have escaped our notice, we believe tliat, speaking generally, 
the foregoing list is a fairly complete one of the more im- 
portant Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch preserved in the dif- 
ferent libraries of Europe. 

' See below, chap. Ill, 4. 

2 See below, chap. Ill, 6. 

' See below, chap. Ill, 1. Also App, 1. 

* See below, cliap. Ill, 2. 

'•> See below, chap. Ill, fi. 

RuODB, Arabic Peotateuob in the Churcti of Egypt 



From the large number of Arabic and Copto-Arabic MSS. 
listed in the precgding chapter, eighteen were selected for 
the purpose of the present study, five of them belonging to 
the bilingual MSS. We secured photographs of the Book of 
Genesis, in whole or in part, and of some other portions of 
the Pentateuch from the following fourteen MSS.: 

Vatic Libr. Copt. 1 

Vatic. Libr. Copt. 2—4 

Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 

B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 

B. N. Paris. Ar. 9 * 

B. N. Paris. Ar. 10 

B. N. Paris. Ar. 12 

British Museum or. 422 

Bodl Libr. Hunt. 33 

Bodl. Libr. Bodl 324 

Bodl. Libr. Marsh. 440 

Bodl. Libr. Pocock. 219 

Bodl. Libr. Land. or. 272 

Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424 
We have been enabled, moreover, through a number of 
selected notes generously placed at our disposal by Prof. 
H. Hvverxat', to control the text of MSS. Ar. 4, Ar. 11. 
Ar. 16, Ar. 18 of the National Library at Paris. 

' Tlipse notes were taken by Prof. H. Httkbnat during bis stay at 
Paris in the autumn of 1911. We are indebted to them for much of our 
material on the Manuscripts of the Bibliotbdque Nationale. 

Part I, Chap. II 35 

And further we have compared the pertinent texts found 
in the liturgical books of the Coptic Church edited by Tuki 
and in Hokner's "Consecration of Church and Altar — Coptic 
Eite", as well as the extracts given by P. Kahle in "Die 
arabiscben Bibeliibersetzungen", and for some places the version 
in Walton's Polyglot. 

Before entering into details it may be well to give, in 
alphabetical order, a list of abbreviations used in this study, 
especially in the text edition which forms the second part of 
our work. 

A = Vatic. Libr. Copt. 1 
B = Vatic. Libr. Copt. 2-4 
C = B. JSf. Paris. Copt. 1 
D = Bodl. Libr. Hunt, 33 
E = Bodl. Libr. Laud. or. 272 
F = B. N. Paris. Ar. 12 
G = British Museum or. 422 
H = B. N. Paris. Ar. 16 
K = Bodl. Libr. Pocock 219 
L = B. N. Paris. Ar. 9 
M = B. N. Paris. Ar. 10 
N = Bodl. Libr. Marsh. 440 
O = B. N. Paris, Ar. 1 1 
P =B. N. Paris. Ar. 18 

R == Text found in Horner's "Consecr. of Church and Altar" 
S = Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 

T = Text found in the liturgical books edited by Tuki 
V = Text found in P. Kahle "Die arab. Bibeliibersetzungen" 
W = Text in Walton's Polyglot 
X=Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424 
Z = The second Araluc text found on MS. B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 (C). 

The Copto-Arabic MSS. treated in this study are those 
designated by A, B, C, D, G. We shall now proceed to 
describe them singly and in detail. 


36 The Coplo-Arabic MSS. of tJu PentaUuch 

1) Vatic. Libr. Copt 1 = A. 

This MS. compi-ises i27B folios, written ou parchment, and 
contains the Pentateuch in Coptic and Arabic. It is evident, 
however, from the aiTangoment of the text that the MS. was 
intended originally for the Coptic text only, the first writer 
having left but a comparatively narrow vacant space both on 
the outer and the inner margin. 

The pages are numbered with Coptic numerals; the first 
and last page of each quire bear on the upper margin an 
ornament in the form of a cross or rosace flanked with the 
usual ejaculatories iTu; (Jesus I), n\o (O ChristI). A later 
hand added on top of the recto the number of the folio in 
European ciphers. 

Arabic variants and notes are written in both margins and 
sometimes over the Coptic text. In several instances (v. g. 
fol. 6', Gen. 5,3. 6. 11) it seems that a few words of the text 
were erased and another reading was written above them. 

We are not directly concerned here with the Coptic text; 
but we may remark in passing that our own investigation 
confirms on the whole the statement of Assesiani (Script. Vet. 
Nova Coll., V, part. 2, p. 114) that the Coptic is an accurate 
translation from the Septuagint, and follows, as we believe, the 
Codex Alexandrinus in differential readings (v. g. Gen. 5n, 12. 13). 
The MS. dates back to the tenth or even to the ninth century >; 
fol. 1 and fol. 4, however, have been added by a later hand, 
perhaps in the twelfth or thirteenth century. The ■^ame later 
scribe seems to have written (with red ink) the Coptic numerals 
in the margin close to the Coptic text, sometimes in the large 
initial letters, to indicate,* for each book severally, the number 
of the sections — J^-«", (▼• g- fol- 1*^, fol. 6» (^. fol. 15 » ig, 
fol. 23* KK, fol. 61* fjA). These sections, however, are not of 
Coptic ojigin, but were probably taken over from some other 
version (possibly Saadias' Arabic version); for the division of 

« See H. Hyverhat, Album de Paleographie Copte, Paris 1888, 
PL 5, 11, 18. 

Part I, Chap. II 37 

the Sacred Text into long paragraphs or chapters was not 
known, as far as we can trace it from other MSS.. in the 
Coptic Church. Certain it is that the repairer of the MS., 
besides restoring fol. 1 and fol. 4, also corrected, or rather 
supplied omis.sions in, the Coptic text', as may be seen fol. 24*' 
(Gen. 22, 7) and fol. 25^ (Gen. 22, 17). In Exodus, Leviticus, 
Numbers and Deuteronomy the so-called Jly>l or (JS, i. e. the 
words of God addressed to Moses or to the Israelites, are 
counted up — for all five books continuously — with Coptic 
numerals, in black ink, put in the margin, and this by the 
original scribe. 

That the Arabic text was added at a later period, there 
cannot be any doubt. It has been literally jammed into the 
narrow outer margin, which was never intended for it; and 
it speaks well for the calligraphic abilities of the scribe, that 
he succeeded in bringing the Arabic corresponding to a complete 
page of the Coptic text into the limited space left at his 
disposal. In a few instances only, especially towards the end 
of Deuteronomy, had he to make use of the lower margin 
also. As the Arabic text throughout is written by the same 
hand, it must have been added after the missing leaves of the 
original Coptic MS. had been replaced by new ones. Moreover, 
as the repairer, we presume, had cut away the lacerated outer 
margin of fol. 187 and fol. 224; the scribe had exceptionally 
to put the Arabic text on the inner margin. For no apparent 
reason he did the same on fol. 275, whilst on fol. 157 ' he had 

1 The Coptic text of this MS. has not yet been utilized for publication. 
David Wilkins claimed to have used for his edition of the Coptic Penta- 
teuch (London 1731) a Vatican (and a I'aris) MS. among others. But 
this was called into doubt by Woide in the preface to the Pentateuch 
in Holmes and Parsons's Vetus Testamentum Graecum (fol. k 4): "credi- 
bile vidotur Wilkensium textum Cod. Hunt. 33 ploi umque typis expressisse"; 
and it has been definitely disproved by De Laoarde in the introduction 
to his own edition of the Coptic Pentateuch (Leipzig 18b7). "Le manuscrit 
1 du Vatican, le plus ancien et sans doute le plus correct des six(?) 
manuscrits connus n'a done pas encore fete utilise" (Hyvernat, Etude 
sur les Vers. Copt. p. 39). 

38 The Copto-Arahic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

to continue on the inner margin from the middle of the page, 
because the lower half of the outer margin had already been 
utilized for some remarks in Coptic. 

We find no clue to determine the precise date when the 
Arabic text was put on our MS. But to judge from the writ- 
ing by the plates in the Arabic Paleograpiiy by B. Morit>:. 
Cairo and Leipzig lHOo (PI. 125—140) we should say that the 
approximate age is from the eleventh to the thirteenth century '. 
Tliis opinion is corroborated by MS. B. N. Paris. Ar. 12, which 
bears the date 1353 and seems to have been copied from MS. 
Vatic. Libr. Copt. 1 (see below, cliap. Ill, 1). 

Fol. l" we read the introductory phrase: ^U.1 <>^lj— >o 

J.^JJ\ «lJ^Xi> J;M\ y 1\ J^l ,_5~:yc »Uy tJO J1.UJ1 J^\ 

J^V\. The sections in the Arabic text corresponding to those 
marked aside of the Coptic are indicated by completely written 
numerals; v. g. fol. 10» e--UJ> J-oiJ\, fol. 22" s^\ji\ J-oiJ\ 
^^^j-ioJ\^ etc. The same band that wrote the Arabic version 
very likely wrote these numerals also, but only after completing 
the text proper. The cud of a section (J-ai) had been indi- 
cated at first by a little black circle which was redrawn later 
with red ink. But for numerals in the form of head-lines the 
scribe had left absolutely no space at first; hence he was 
forced to crowd them between the lines in minute characters 
and this at times makes them almost illegible. One or the 
other is not marked, v. g. the 32 d section, chap. 26,1 (fol. SO*"); 
and the 8 th section (fol. 7") is marked at chap. 6,8 instead 
of 6,9. The Coptic numeral (il) stands aside of the Coptic 
text in a line which contains the beginnings of both verse 8 
and verse 9. But at verse 9 (hai) a little slanting line is 
placed to show the real beginning of section 8. The Arabic 
scribe did not take note of this, and so he placed the mark 
indicating the new section at the beginning of tlie 8th verse 

I We refer also to: Specimina Codicum Orieutalium conlegit Edob- 
Nius TissERAST. Boiinae 1914. Compare PI. 62», 56'— 58. 

Part I, Chap. II 39 

in his Arabic text'. This points to the conclusion that the 
repairer of the Coptic MS. and the writer of the Arabic text 
cannot be one and the same person. 

Genesis ends fol. 65*; the Coptic colophon on the following 
page tells us that there are 4500 stichi^ in this book: 

I'GIIOOK; (511 Oipilllll Allllll CTOIVOC A(|>. 

Fol. 6G°- shows a full-page picture of the Madonna with 
the Infant; on the verso Exodus begins with the invocation 
of the name and the help of God, a common practice which 
is observed in the remaining tlfi-ee books also. 

The text of Exodus is interrupted by a beautiful pen- 
drawing3 which represents Moses the Prophet and covers the 
whole page fol. 97 ^ The nineteenth J-os (i. e. the twenty- 
fifth chapter) begins on the next folio under the heading: imne 
riou)^ iiicKTiiii, "de dispositione Tabernaculi". Exodus 
concludes on fol. 121-^: ecoAOt; eii uipiiiiii tiokuj aiiiiii 
GTOiA'oc rX" (3600 stichi); above the transverse bar of a 
pretty plaited cross is written ic vc iiika, and below tnc. 
nxc Aqo-|>o. 

Leviticus containing 2700 stichi runs from fol. 121'' to 166", 
where we read: agtitikoii eii oipiiiiii tojkcju auiiii ctolyo<' 
B'h. There follows a beautifully written colophon-' containing 
chiefly a petition to pray for the writer who calls himself 
Salomon Babylon, without, however, adding any further details 
to satisfy our curiosity about his person. It should be observed 
that Lev. 23, 20* (of the Septuagint) is lacking both in the 
Coptic and in the Arabic. 

' We adopted the suggestion as to the right place of this section 
from MS. Vatic. Ar. 2, where we find the same divisions as in our MS. 

2 On the stichi and other text divisions see H. B. Swete, An Intro- 
duction to the Old Testament in Greek, Cambridge 1902, pp. 341—361. 
For eajiitulation and stichometry of the Coptic versions compare also 
David Wilkins' Coptic Pentateuch, Praef. ad finem, and P. de Laqakue, 
Orientalia, p. 125. 

3 See H. Hyverkat, Allium de Paleographie Copte, PI. 19. 
* ibid. PI. 18. 

40 The Copto- Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

The text of Numbers, which begins fol. 166'', presents some 
interesting features that deserve to be noticed. On fol. 212'' 
(chap. 28. 19) and fol. 213" (chap. 29, 13) there are given Coptic 
variants in the margin "according to a MS. of the Arabic 
version": ^^^ ^~>j ^^— just as On fol. 7^ and in some other 
places Arabic variants are cited from the same source '. On 
the same fol. 213" we encounter a considerable lacuna in the 
Coptic text: chap. 28, 23 — 29, 5 incl. have dropped out enti- 
rely. This omission is, howev6r, easily accounted for, since 
29. 6 commences with the same words as 2iS, 23, viz., .ytopic 
ijnr.\i.\ (iy^-iJl ^^jS ^ in the Arabic version). But what is 
of greater importance is the fact that the whole passage is 
also missing in the Arabic; nor is there any explanatory note 
or any remark whatever referring to tlie lacuna, although the 
text in question is found both in the Hebrew and in all the 
recensions of the Septuagint. AVe have here, then, it would 
seem, a strong proof, that the Arabic version on the margin 
of our MS. was made either directly from the Coptic of this 
very MS. or, more likely, perhaps, from a Coptic original where 
this passage had already dropped out. 

Fol. 219''— 221" contain the thirty-third section of JS'um- 
bers (chap. 33, 1 — 33, 60). Here we see again that the Arabic 
version follows the Coptic closely, whereas the latter is not 
precisely so exact in rendering the Greek original; for a later 
hand — the one we think that wrote the headings of the dif- 
ferent sections— inserted into the Arabic text a few supple- 
mentary readings from the Septuagint The chapter speaks 
of the stations or halts made by the Israelites in the desert. 
Our reviser counts up in the Arabic text the number of encamp- 
ments, or rather— to be exact — the number of "moviugs of 
the camp", by placing Coptic cursive - figures over the name of 
the place from which the Israelites started. In v. 16 he adds: 
U-«— ajJj ^^ 'y-s^j'j (which he designates as twelfth start), 
words missing in the Coptic, but corresponding to the Greek: 

' See beJow, note 1 on page 4.5. ' Oalled Copto-Arabic. 

Part I, Chap. II 41 

Kixl uTT'ipav fK T^s eprjuov "Zeivd. Similarly in v. SG*" he adds, as 
the thirty-third start, what we read in the LXX: *cai aTrTipay 

eK T^s eptjuov Sell/ koI Trapevk(ia.\ov d% tijv (pijixoi- 'Papdv. Tha WOrds 

following: avT>; ea-Tiv KaSr/s are found in the Coptic and in the 
original Arabic, but our scribe now adds v. 37'': Km dirripav Ik 
Kuovjs, which he counts as the thirty-fourth start, giving him 
a total of 42 movings of the camp. 

Fol. 225" Numbers ends and the colophon attributes 3835 
stichi to the book: Apioiioc on Bipiiiiii aim in (rroivoc rtovt; . 
We may remark at this j)oint, that it is to be regretted there 
is no indication whatever at the end of Deuteronomy which 
might serve to complete the list of the number of stichi for 
the Five Books of Moses from this MS '. 

Deuteronomy begins fol. 225'' and ends 274'' precisely at 
the l>ott(im of the page, so that there was no room for any 
lengthy colophon; merely a few concluding words were added 
in small characters, but ii\j^\ t-.o;S — .LL^I A_^*^a. — c^^ 
is all that remains, the rest has been mutilated and cut away. 

Fol. 274 and 275 are out of order. Fol. 273'' ends with 
Deut. 32, 52"; the text continues on fol. 275 (recto and verso) 
and then runs to fol. 274* at Deut. 33, 20 ending at the bottom 
of fol. 274^ 

Fol. 276" we read the colophon 2; ^il j}\jL\ ^\ ^^.^ 

»l_jyJl ;^'° li-a J.-vS.\.»;Jl '^S <JJ ^^Ml f->.J>.iJl J..i^\jJI ^UJ\ 

"lu the name of God the Creator, the Living, the Intelligent, 
the Only, the Ancient, the Eternal, to Him all glory. This 
is the Book of the Holy Law which was sent down (revealed) 

1 SwETE, 1. c. p. 346 from three Greek MSS. gives 3100, 3300 and 

2700, respectively, as the number of stichi for Deuteronomy. 

2 Written probably by the same hand that wrote the Araliic text, 
the numbers of the ij^-^as in the same and also the indication of the 
respective book in the left hand corner of the upper margin on the 
verso of each folio, v. g. (J5^' ji.~Jl i_j^^^ -i-^Jl etc. 

42 The Copto-Arahic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

to Moses the Prophet of God, peace be upon lum. And it is 
[consists of] five books that contain 142 sections." In paren- 
theses is added: Myf ^yUS'^ ij:^ (sic) U ^^.-tyj. "in them are 
186 allocutions" (i. e. of God to Moses or to the Israelites, 
as we remarked above) written with red ink by another hand 

Then follows the number of sections (J^>^) for each single ' 
book, viz., Genesis 47, Exodus 26, Leviticus 16, Numbers 35, 
Deuteronomy 18, and — by .another hand in red ink— the number 
of allocutions (Jlyil) occurring in each of the four last books, 
viz., in Exodus 78, in Leviticus 37, in Numbers 66, and in 
Deuteronomy 5. 

The codex concludes with tlie ordinary prayer: 

"Let praise be given to the Lord of Glory always without 
interruption, and His mercy be upon us forever. Amen." 

We do not intend to discuss here in detail the question 
as to the nature of the Arabic version found in our MS. It 
is obvious from even the few instances we have indicated that 
the opinion of those who believe the Arabic to be a direct 
translation from the Greek without the intermediary of the 
Coptic can hardly be correct. On the contrary we hold for 
certain that careful study will bear out the opinion of Asse- 
MANi (1. c. p. 114), that the Arabic version corresponds exactly 
to the Coptic and has been made without any direct reference 
to the Greek original of the latter. 

2) Vatic. Libr. Copt. 2-4 = B. 

This codex written in the fourteenth century was intended 
from the first to be a bilingual MS., as is shown by the neat 
arrangement of the columns of the Coptic and Arabic text. 

Cod. 2 contains Genesis and Exodus, Cod. 3 Leviticus and 
Numbers, Cod. 4 Deuteronomy, the three MSS. constituting in 
contents and form one complete Pentateuch. 

• AssEMANi, 1. c. J). 115, gives 27 for Exodus— evidently a typogrn- 
pliical error; just as he assigns 279 folios to the codex instead of 276. 

Part I, Chap. II 43 

The two texts in our MS. were written at the same time, 
and it seems that the rare Coptic corrections and the nume- 
rous Arabic variants all come from the hand of the original 
scribe who was a certain Gabriel, son of Phanus, as is stated 
at the end of Cod. 4. The Coptic text agress with that in 
Ms. Vatic. Libr. Copt. 1, although a Coptic Patriarch quoted 
by AssEMANi (Script. Vet. Nova Coll., V, part. 2, p. 115) says 
in the Arabic prefatory note, that the Coptic text shows a 
number of mistakes, but that on the whole the scribe's work 
was well done ' . 

The Arabic text is very much like the one that is found 
on the margin of Ms. Vatic. Libr. Copt. 1; yet it is not iden- 
tical with the latter. And the question might well be raised 
(a careful study of the variants given in our text edition — 
part II of the present work — affords excellent material for 
suggestions), whether or not the Arabic version underlying 
these two recensions is really the same, or whether we have 
two original translations, one from the Coptic and only indi- 
rectly from the Greek, the other directly from the Greek, 
with special reference, however, to the Coptic. 

The codex is made up of quinions, as is clearly shown by 
the usual Coptic abljreviations (v. g. nATic, ii\u etc.) found 
on fol. 17*', 18% 27 ^ 28'' etc, and by the Coptic numerals 
placed on the corresponding pages to show the end of one 
(v. g. IT on fol. 17 ''j and the beginning of the next (v. g. r on 
fol. IS'') quire. 

Tiie first quinion ends fol. 7''; according to this reckoning 
we siiould suppose that the text begins on the fourth page of 
the MS. (marked by a later hand with Arabic-European 
numeral as 1). But in fact the Coptic numerals (of which 
several are missing, several wrong) marking the pages show 
(v. g. S*" bears the mark = 12) that the text really begins on 
the sixth page of the MS. The page preceding fol. 1" is 

1 This Patriarch is Matthew, 87 th Patriarch of Alexandria (1382—1405). 
His "censura" bears the date: 3rd Chiach 1115 A. M. = 1398 A. D. 

44 The Cqpto-Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

ornamented with a largo plaited cross (which, however, is not 
in itself a sufficient indication of the liturgical use of this 
MS.), and in tiie four corners formed by the cross-bars we 
read: iTi-xn-TiT-iTX, Jesus Christ conquers. 

The Coptic text is arranged in short sections as we find 
them ordinarily in Coptic MSS. of Scripture, and there is no 
indication of chapters or longer divisions of any kind in the 
original text, either in the Coptic nor the Arabic. But a later 
hand has written on the margin, beside of the Arabic text, 
the current number of the chapters in European numerals 
(some of these, however, are missing). On several pages (1*. 
4", 27^ 52^ 67'') we find the picture of a bird as the initial 
Ali>ha, and the common arabesfjue ornament, with the head 
of a bird, flowers and a trailing stem, used in decorating the 
margin (v. g. fol. 1" and fol. 86»). 

In the artistic head-piece fol. 1 " we read the words: cm 
u(uo. *Ji\ f,-^, and a little lower down the introductory for- 
umla continues, in (Joptic and Araliic: <OJ\ ^^j>v ,3>>-~^> 
iJoJ^\ yL^ J^Vl _^i— Jl ,^^1 ^-^-^ »\jy:J\ ■)[Jl^\ k....^^ ._^j:SJ> 
Genesis ends on fol. 85'' (por =176 with the words written 
in heavy capital Greek letters: i'(;iii;t:i(: (uioipiiiiii aiiiiii 
GTOi\(j(; X"A = 4600. Then follows a Coptic (.'olophon whii'h 
says: "Bless me, forgive me, my fathers, who will read in this 
book; I beg and implore you to remember my lowliness in 
your prayers: and may the merciful God reward you for your 
labors. Amen, Amen ', Amen'", and this inscription in Arabic: 
^^.s::^-^^' A(|) J^Vl Jl^\ \S.a> OLils::^-^^^ >•>■'- ^^^ i^s^^ (j >j^ 
"it is stated in a MS. that the number of o-t(x<>i of this first 
book are 4500 o-tixoi." This is precisely the number given in 
the colophon of MS. Vat. Libr. Copt. 1 (see preceding paragraph). 

Exodus commences on fol. 86' with a short introductory 
formula: r^r^' f^-^ **• ilrr^' <j^^ i^^^ ^i-^l .UJl ^.^ 

' The second "Amen" is written in numeric characters (JO = 99 (i. e. 
AMHN = 1 + 40 -f B + 50). Assemani (I. c. j). 116) gives a rather peculiar 
translation: '•Anion, noiiayii's novoiii. Amen". 

I'art I, Chap. 11 45 

and at the end of this book fol. IBS'" we are informed that 
the scribe was the monk Gabriel son of Phanus. On the 
same page there is an epigraph written by John, the 96th 
Patriarch of Alexandria, 23 rd Mesori 1302 A. M. (era of the 
Martyrs) = 1586 A. D., to the effect that this copy of the 
Pentateuch was given in perpetuity to the Church of Our 
Lady in the borough of Zoaila of the city of Cahira (Cairo). 
The same dedicatory letter is found in the other two volumes, 
cod. 3 and cod. 4. 

The Arabic text in tliis MS. is written very legibly and 
on tlie whole it is fairly correct; but a number of mistakes 
show that the verdict given by Patriarch Matthew concerning 

'the Coptic text (see above) applies equally well to the Arabic 
version. The text is but meagerly pointed, in distinction to 
MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 which contains an almost fully vocalized 
Arabic text. 

We find in this MS. as in MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 a number of 
Arabic notes, which are either liturgical remarks, or brief 
indications of the subject-matter, or variants from other MSS., 
or corrections and annotations by the scribe. 

Of the liturgical notes and the variant readings we shall 
have occasion to speak later. Indications of the contents are, 
lor instance, fol. 9^ o)*-^^-" '*-'^ (story of the flood), fol. 26 '^ 
^3,>_w *.^i> (story of Sodom), fol. 28'' io^\ CjLo i^" (story of 

-the daughters of Lot), fol. 2ii" <^-:^?' 2-< ^.*'x'^ ^-^ (the story 
of Abraham with Abimelech). Of remarks by the writer we 
may mention fol. 15'' ^.f^^\ ij ,_y^ IJ-* o*-^ (this Cainan 
is missing in the Aral)ic), showing that the writer knew an 
Arabic text translated from the Hebrew'; fol. 23'' he compares 

1 Because Gpii. 10, 22 Cainan is actually not mentioned in tlie Hebrew, 
whereas his name is found in i\w Arabic text of our MS. In this place, 
as also in MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 fol. 7* and elscwhei'e we hesitated whether 
we ought to read the variant u-?;* (usually abbreviated ^ in our MSS.) 
or ^\y^. Yet repeated scrutiny confirmed us in the opinion that the 
correct reading is (_y>^. It would seem, then, that (_5-?7* denotes an 
Arabic version made from the Hebrew, perhaps Saadias' translation. This 

46 The Copte-Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

in a variant the Coptic, Arabic and the "correct" text; fol. 77" 
,e~^l Ja*? ^i ^-~^ i^i- '"This is missing in some manu- 
script". Several times, v. g. fol. 3'' (Gen. 2, 4). fol. 6' (Ueii. 3, 24), 
we find the rem<ark 'ijiL\ Lut ^j\, which we take to be a litur- 
gical note designating the end of a lection: "up to here is 
the end". 

The same hand that wrote this model Codex also wrote 
MS. Copt. 3, which contains Leviticus (fol. l"* — 55") and Numbers 
(fol. 55—123), and MS. Copt, i (60 fol.) which contains the text 
of Deuteronomy. Here, as in MS. Copt. 2 the frontispiece 
shows a plaited cross in various colors, but vdth this inscrip- 
tion distributed in the fom* angles: iU-vp-vo-or, Jesus Christ 
the Son of God. 

On the margin of MS. 4 there are a number of notes in red 
ink indicating the days on which certain sections of the text 
are to be read at the Divine Services. 

3) B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 = C. 

This MS. is thus described by J. B. Chabot in his "In- 
ventaire Sommaire des Manuscrits Coptes de la Bibliotheque 
Nationale", Paris 1906, p. 6: "Codex bombycinus inter prae- 
cipua Bibliotbecae regiae, si characterum elegantiam spectes, 
ornamenta numerandus. Ibi continctur Pentateuchus, e graeca 
lingua in copticam conversus, una cum interpretatione arabica, 
quae copticae praesertim respoudet. Acceduut notulae quaedam 
ad marginem conjectae. Is codex, manu Michai'lis, monachi, 
filii Abrahami, anno Martyrum ]07(j, Christi 1360, exaratus 

This is indeed a remarkable manuscript. It was arranged 
from the beginning to receive the Coptic and the Arabic texts. 
The pages are numbered with Coptic and Copto- Arabic' 
numerals on the verso, but many of the numbers are missing. 

assumption is not at all improbable, considering tbat Saadias' version, 
though perhaps not older than the Arabic text found on our bilingual 
Egyptian MSS., is certainly autiTior to the time at which tliese MSS. 
were written. ' Printed in ordinary Coptic figures in this Study. 

Part I. Chap. II 47 

The recto has been marked by a later hand with European 
Arabic numerals. From the discrepancy between the old and 
the new pagination (ilT, 12 = 9''; m, 19 — 16'') we are led to 
conclude that the first page of the text (1") must have been 
originally foh 3» of the MS. No indication of quires ((juiiiions 
or quaternions) is to be found on the rotographs in our 

Fol. 1" Genesis begins with the well-known phrase: ^i*o 

Foh 91* we read the colophon (written later, as it seems 
to us): f^-^ ,iJL,JjH yi.^ yb^ isl^yiJI ^^ J^"^' _«.^\ li" itX^S^^ 

^^\ C-}^\ cr* a.nd at the bottom of the page there are three 
lines perpendicular to the lines of the text: iijUL* jxj 
.^JJ j^sr»-''^ -Aji^^W Ja-io y^i. fxAjLi" jj J.-o'^Lj LijLsi^ Istv^s"**^^ 

AOT ^ i^w \^\ Uiili 

"The collation and correction in conformity with (made 
by comparison with) the original was finished on the nine- 
teenth of the montli of Choiac — and glory be to God forever 
and always — in the year 1073, of the era of the Martyrs" 
[= 1356 A. D.]. 

Fol. 91'', 92 and 93 are left blank. 

Exodus commences fol. 94^ with the words: ^Ij dJS\ (...wj 
^yi.\ -i-io ySLM>, and closes fol. \lh^ with this remark in the 
margin: y^ ^^^ i3 3)^^ lilyMI ^s- Vsx^s:^^^ ilsUixi jX> 
A03 iLUo aj^Ij j^^ "The collation and correction according to 
the parchment copy • was fiuislied on the eleventh of Tobe in 
the year 1074" [A. M. = 1358 A. D.]. 

' For lalj-^Vl see E. QuAiREMfeRE in Notices et Extraits des Manu- 
scrits de la Bibliotheque Iinperiale, vol. VIII (Paris 1810), p. 226, note 4. 
"Le mot l^U'K 'lue j'ai rencontre egalement a la fin du Pentateuque 
(ms. Copte no. 1) me paroit un pluriel forme du mot Grcc yparf>if\ But 
may the form not rathor be taken as a singular? Compare Al-Makriki's 
statement: U^.»\ = ypdipuf, in B. T. Kvetts, The Cliurclies and INIonasteries 
of Egypt (Anccdotu Oxoniensia, Semitic Series, Part VII — Oxford 1895), 
p. 250, note 2; also R. Dozr, Supplement aux Dictionnairea Arabes, 
vol. II, p. 204: |^^-vs\ji = ypiKpeloi'. — For 3^ see Quatremere I. c. 

48 T/j* Copto-Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

In Exodus, Lovit, Numbers and Deuteronomy the times 
God spoke to Moses are counted up on the margin l>y tlie 
original writer in Arabic numerals written in blood-red ink. 
(Compare MS. Vatic. Copt. 1.) The Ten Commandments are 
similarly distinguished (see below, chap. IV, 1). • 

The scribe whose work we have before us deserves special 
notice as a grammarian and a text-critic of no mean order. 
He seems also to have been very conversant with the Coptic 
language. Of the grammatical and critical talent he displays 
we shall instance only two examples: 

1) Fol. 5^ Genesis 3. 6 — to the word (Jjha/ epuc| in the 
text, this annotation is maile in vertical lines in the margin: 

UyiV <|)IKVr ^i-UI j^j.^^ Ua-^r? 3^ ^5 

<|)iiAv v:uj>)Jl ^_^-^-«-»^ 
<|)iiAi- npoq is derived from niiiAV, "look" (or "glance"); there 
is no difference between iiiiiat and <|)MA'r, both forms being 
determined (i. e. having the definite article prefixed); (J)IIAT, 
however, occurs elsewhere sometimes in the sense of "time". 
2)Fol. 5^ Genesis 3,14, referring to the word KujovopTutioK. 
he tries to explain the difference between the Coptic expression 
just quoted in the second person singular masculine (to whicii 
he adds J-ol, "the original") and the feminine in the Arabic. 
cuil iovai-o. he says, would correspond in Coptic to another 
form, <;«)?ovopTiieo, i. e. the second person singular feminine, 
and it refers to the word ("serpent", which is feminine in 
Arabic), not to the object. Thus also the pronoun >j:^\ refers 
to <iJ<:>., whicli is feminine, but the J-o\ (the original text, 
i. e. the Coptic) has correctly the masculine pronoun, as the 
feminine cannot be used for that whicii is masculine, and in 
the Coptic the pronoun refers to ni^uii (^^L-aJ), which is 

p. 225, 1. 3 and p. 226, 1. 12: Jjj «><s3_wo =un exemplaire en parchemin; 
also La.iie'8 Arabic-English Dictionary, part III, p. 1130. 

Fart I, Chap. II 49 

masculine. The note (i-JiU.) reads as follows: ccjeoropTiioo 

Ji CUJ_^ ^^.^-^^ ^ii^ J_js:^. ^Jj;)^J i-iiJl ^ j-==^^^ ^*3 J-^''J> ^'5 
jj.* jiU _^JjJ I .-^.^-.aJ iJ^iJIi _-^JjJ\ J^Ljo \-SJwo ^^IS Lo 

Witness to his proficiency in Coptic is borne not only hy 
the frequent variants introduced by 3 (as in A and B), but 
also by the fact that repeatedly, more especially in the first 
fifteen pages of his Coptic text, he brings Arabic words above 
or below the Coptic, not always the word found in the Arabic 
text but rather an Arabic term expressing more precisely the 
shade of meaning conveyed by the Coptic. Thus, for example, 
fol. 7'' (Gren. 4, 13) in Cain's expression of despair: "My sin is 
too great etc." the Arabic reads: ,_^xjlk^; but as the Coptic 
has a masculine noun nAiiOBi, our scribe writes below this 
word a corresponding masculine Arabic noun ^11^4.. — In the 
following verse: icse vuajitt ("Behold Thou castest me 
forth") he puts over the letter x the letter k and the Arabic 
li), to which he adds the remark ^ (= t-o, it is correct). 
It seems that thereby he wished to indicate the hard (k) 
pronunciation of the letter v in the word vma and that, per- 
haps, he had found in some MS. the k written over the v for 
this very purpose (comp. L. Stern, Koptische Grammatik, 
Leipzig 1880, p. 17, n. 19.) 

Again in several places (see chapters IV, V, XVIII) he 
writes the full words for the Coptic numerals into the margin 
(sometimes even above the Coptic text) instead of the Coptic 
ciphers used in the text: at times he adds a remark like the 
following: J.'oVl ^ ^^Lo (explanation or precise meaning 
according to the original, Gen. 5, 3, fol. 8"), or: ibLjLc jb 
J.^\)\ ^J.»* \.s\.^^sr^^ (So far the collation and correction accord- 
ing to the original— Gen. 4, 20, fol. 7'^), or simply: aJjUL.* jb 
J.-<»'!J\ ^ (So far the collation according to the original — Gen. 
19, 1, fol. 27''). 

Rhodk, Arabic Peotateucb in the Church of Egypt. 4 

50 The Copto-Arabic MSS. of the Fentateuch 

It remains for us to speak of the most interesting feature 
of tins remarkable codex. "We have already noted that the 
scribe frequently endeavors to assign the exact Arabic equi- 
valent of the Coptic phrase or word in the very Coptic text. 
Yet this does not seem to have been the original intention of 
the copyist. He wished to adapt his Arabic version much 
more closely to the Coptic. For when we turn tu fol. 1 '' of 
our MS. we are struck by the singular fact that there are 
two Arabic versions on the margin, one on either side of the 
Coptic. A careful scrutiny of the two texts reveals the fact 
that the text on the inner margin, to the right, is a trans- 
lation made literally from the Coptic. The other text, on the 
outer margin, to the left, agrees with the version found in MSS. 
Vatic. Copt. 1 and 2. If we proceed to examine the Arabic 
text found on the first page of our MS. (in tlie outer margin) 
we find that it difi'ers from the version of the Vatican codices 
just mentioned, l)ut agrees literally with the Coptic. Turning 
to fol. 2", 2'' etc., however, we are again surprised to see that 
the text is almost word for word that of the Vatican codices. 
How are we to account for this phenomenon? 

We venture the following suggestion. The writer of MS. C 
(or perhaps of its prototype) intended to join to his Coptic 
text an Arabic translation, which would not so much represent 
the traditional Arabic version, as serve for a clear under- 
standing of the Coptic text. For this reason he himself com- 
posed an Arabic version, which he entered on the main (right) 
margin of the MS. But before long, when he had written 
only two pages of his MS., he seems to have encountered some 
difficulty, either that the task appeared too irksome to him or 
that his new text was too widely divergent from the customary 
version employed m the liturgy. In consequence he relinquished 
his design and from the tliird page onward copied the tradi- 
tional Arabic translation. But in order that his AVabic text 
might still be uniform and serviceable for the liturgy, he now 
wrote on the left narrow margin on the second page (fol, l**) 
the usual Arabic rendering of the Sacred Text, using red ink 

tart I, Chap. II 51 

for the sake of special emphasis. Oa the first page, however, 
this completion of the ordinary version was rendered impossible, 
because on this page the writer had used very large and 
ornate letters and consequently there was no left margin that 
might be utilized for another text. From this new difficulty 
our scribe extricated himself in the best way possible under 
the circumstances: he simply entered into his own Arabic 
translation the variants of the ordinary version. On the other 
hand he is loath to give up his first plan of furnishing an 
accurate translation of the Coptic; and, therefore, in the course 
of his work he marks into the Coptic text itself quite fre- 
quently the Arabic equivalents of Coptic words and phrases 
that seem to him to call for a more precise explanation. 

Thus it happens that we have in our MS., beginning with 
Gen. 1,3, the ordinary Copto-Arabic text as represented by 
the Vatican MSS. mentioned above. We have, moreover, in 
the same MS. for the first ten verses of Genesis a version 
made verbatim from the Coptic '. This second Arabic trans- 
lation we designate by the letter Z in our collation of texts 
(Part II, Sect. II). 

A phenomenon similar to that just mentioned as regards 
Genesis is noticeable at the beginning of Exodus and Leviticus. 
There we find but one Arabic version to the right of the 
Coptic; but this Arabic translation is a literal rendering of 
the Coptic at least for the first verses of each book 2, and 
some of the variants are an attempt at a still closer adherence 
to the original. Compare the first verses of Exodus, fol. 94*: 

1^3^)1 C^yo-^ Cr^i) y'^^ l-^' ^i^j^ '*~^ J~^3 i>-r».l^l ^X^U I f-«3-f.-? ^ 

o'^5 j^^LyOa y.y^\^ >\^^ j»^Lii.J ^\'> OJ^U T^^'-^^.^ ^^.^'o^.? 

> The Coptic text of MS. B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 seems to differ some- 
what from that of the Vatican MSS. and to represent a later recension. 

2 We are unable to say whether the Arabic version of these books 
is uniform throughout, because we did not have access to the complete MS. 


52 Tlic Cuplo-Arahk- MUS. uf the FenlaUuvh 

1) In the margin: ^a )i^*> j), i. e. iiaiik: in the Coptic. 

2) In the margin: 'j>^-* 

3) In the margin: '^J (he means to say: ._.J-o is not in 
the Copt.) 

4) In the margin: LvJi ^^l.^ • (i. e. another MS. has 
70 persons, not 76) 

Here the attempt to imitate the Coptic is plainly apparent: 

a) eTA'i"iul)|>iii = Wjj cr?.>>J* 

b) eoTcon = l-»-;J♦^^ 

C) IIIOiWI IIIOVAI = j.i>.iyi >Xi..iyi 

d) puvr>iiii = c^)j 

e) uA(|\'ii = '^^^y* 

Fol. 178% the beginning of Leviticus, we read: C^j^^ >^>^^ 
^_yX> gx fSS3 ^^\l\ ^U ii>l4,.-iJl J^ i^^yc <»juo fJ^} i^y^y <J* ^^^ 
^\^\ cr^ JjyU l->b^ i_.}9 1>1 (►i-^ ^UJ\ JS ^ Ji^ J^j^^ 

Here again the translator plainly follows the Coptic: 

a) ovo? AFim; cr/Ai'uu uovl- euovciic; = S-'r'' ^•^^^ 

b) X(j rendered frequently in these versions by ^')i\ 

c) The addition ot C->^ to Ub^', corresponding to (jiuTc. 
The text of Numbers and Deuteronomy diflers but slightly 

from the ordinary Copto-Arabic version. 

4) Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 33 = D. 
This MS. is of rather recent date; according to a note 
at the end of Deuteronomy it was finished in the month of 
Amshir 1390 A. M. = 1(374 A. D. It consists of 495 folios 
in double columns symmetrically arranged for two texts. The 
writing is done very neatly; but a careful examination of the 
text shows (tlie variants in our text edition, J^art II, Sect. II, 
bear evidence to our assertion), that the scribe must have 
belonged to the class of copyists rather than a student; for 
his calligraphy is by no means a test of his critical correctness. 

Part I, Chap. II 53 

The title page with the inscription: kl^yJI ^U.* 
i^jLiLJI bears the page number b = 2. The next page, 
however, where the text of the Pentateuch begins beneath an 
ornamental head-piece, is marked with the European numeral 8, 
corresponding to tlie Coptic r = 3 and thus the old and 
new pagination continue. We cannot find any clue in the 
catalogues or on the rotographs in our possession to explain 
this defi'erence of five openings between the old and the recent 
foliation. The quires are distinguished by Coptic numerals 
and bear on the first and last pages the usual abbreviations 
(i(3, xv,, vc, uTT, men). The first ends with fol. 15^ the twelfth 
with fol. 121''; but we notice that the latter page corresponds 
to 120'' (i>ii) in the Coptic foliation — proof that either eight 
pages dropped out in the Coptic numbering or that eight pages 
were counted twice in the modern marking. The arrangement 
of tlie (piires would then have been by quinions. 

There are no divisions whatever in the text; but up to 
fol. 89'' a European (?) hand as added the numbers of our 
chapters on the margin. There are no marginal glosses, no 
corrections, no indication of copyist or origin ("Herkunft"). 

As stated above (chap. I, A) the Coptic text of this MS. 
was edited by David Wilkins, London 1731. Whether the 
Coptic text of the MS. really contains the "exceedingly great" 
number of mistakes spoken of by De Lagarbe (Der Pentateuch 
Koptisch, p. VII sqq.) as being found in Wilkins' edition, we 
are unable to say, because this work is exceedingly rare. 
Certain it is that the Coptic text contains not a few and the 
Arabic text even a very large number of errors attributable 
to the negligence of the copyist. 

In fact both the Coptic and the Arabic version found on 
this MS. seem to be but a copy, directly or indirectly (i. e. 
probably through tlie "Tattam" MS. ', see below chap. II, 5j, 

' As the first part of MS. Brit. Mus. or. 422, ■'Tattam", is lost, we 
arc unable to establish with absolute certainty, what seeina to us to be 
actually the case, viz. that MS. Bodl. Hunt. 33 is a modern copy of MS. 
Brit. Mus. or. 422. 

54 The Copto-Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch 

from MS. B. N. Copt. 1 (see above chap, II, 3). The intro- 
duction to Genesis is literally the same in both, in Coptic as 
well as in Arabic. The colophon to Genesis (t'ol. 126'', Copt. = 
piiti = 125'') is very similar to, although not quite identical 
with, that of the Paris MS., viz.: y«> ^^JJl J^> *_^^-l J..*^^ p 

._^\ Ijoc,^ \jo\ Uib A.!) ,.-..^1. .,\UiJ\,. "Finished and 
completed is the first book, which is the Book of the Creation, 
with peace from the Lord; and remember 'the poor scribe in 
mercy and indulgence; and praise be to God for ever and 
ever and ever. Amen." 

But there is still a much stronger argument to show that 
our MS. is in fact a mere transcript from the Paris MS., or 
at least from the prototype or a copy made from the latter, 
and a very carelessly and mechanically made transcript withal. 
For the scribe began to write as his Arabic text the first 
two verses of his original ("Vorlage") which represent, as 
shown above (chap. II, 3), the personal translation of the writer 
of MS. C. He then proceeded to copy the version found on 
the main (right) margin of MS. C, without noticing that he 
now had a mixed Arabic text, viz. from Genesis 1, 1 — 10 the 
version of scribe C, and afterwards the customary Copto- 
Arabic translation. 

Another proof of the negligence and the lack of critical 
acumen on the part of scribe D may be seen in this, that 
he drops all the variants, remarks and Arabic equivalents of 
Coptic words wherewith the writer of MS. C had endeavored 
to render his text more accurate and useful. This character- 
istic of the work of scribe D is further confirmed by the 
observation that, in the course of his copying, he is guilty of 
many omissions and ([uite a large number of erroneous readings 
and faulty spellings. 

5) British Museum or. 422 = G. 

This Copto-Arabic MS. is the one that De Lagaede used for 
his edition of tlie Coptic Pentateuch along with the printed 

Part I, Chap. II 55 

edition of Wilktns. It is fully described by him in the preface 
(p. Ill — IX), and from p. X to p. XXXVIII he gives a long 
list of variants of this MS. from the readings adopted in his 
printed text ("Der Pentateuch Koptisch", Leipzig 1867). An 
extensive description of this MS. is also found in Ceom's Cat. 
of Copt. ]\rSS. in the Br. Mus. p. 315. 

The volume was presented to the monastery of Anba Abshai 
(n^oi) in the Nitrian desert as a "perpetual legacy" (LiS^ 
,_j^l LJI ^j--j>jJlJ\ yyJ I^L*), as is frequently noted in the 
MS. according to Ceum, 1. c. 

The date given by the copyist fol. 63" at the end of Genesis 
in Copto-Arabic ciphers is 1109 A. M. = 1393 A. D. (not 
i.n = 1019, as De Lagaede would have it). For, as Ckum has 
already remarked, we read there: LijLj»^ IsrrjT.:^'^ ^ iJoUL* jb 

1109, Aerae martyrum = 1393 A. D.< 

There are considerable lacunae in Genesis, Numbers, 

Deuteronomy, especially at the beginning (almost 19 chapters 

of Genesis are missing) and at the end (3 chapters of Deuter- 
onomy) of the volume. 

The colophon of Genesis is identical with that of MS. B. 
N. Copt. 1: 

There are but very few variants in the margin; v. g. 
Exod. 37,16 (Septuag. = Hebr. 36,38) to the words ovoi u^at 
there is the variant: eroi ii?out ^^^ cr* •*-:s'^'' 1^*5 • 
Sometimes a more literal translation of the Coptic is added 
under the heading ^;.uiJl J^; e. g. Numbers 24,19, where 
the Arabic text reads: ^yi-ll cr^ ^.j^' '^'-M^^. ("he shall 
destroy the fugitive from the towns") the remark is made: J^i 
*.Xiy..Jl j^ UJL=j. l.x^l^ '^^=^.3 Lj^^^' (the text of the Coptic: 
"he shall destroy every inhabitant out of the city". And in 

' HrvERNAT, Etude sur les versions Coptes de la Bible, p. 10, adopt- 
ing Lagardk's statement, must be corrected accordinglj-. 

66 The Copto- Arabic MSS. of the Eentateuch 

general the text appears to be identical with that of Bodl. 
Libr. Hunt. .'S3. We shall speak at greater length in a later 
chapter' of the probable relation of MSS. C, D. and G. 

Dk Lagahde remarks (1. c. p. IX) that the Arabic translation 
found in the margin of this MS. is not without interest, that 
it agrees with the one called by Holmes "Arab. 3"' (see below 
Chap. IV. 1), and that at least the proper names are taken 
from a Semitic, not from a Coptic, original. These opinions 
of the eminent scholar are borne out by a closer study of the 
text ill question; and although we cannot here discuss exhaust- 
ively the points in question, we may refer to the variants 
designated by the letter "G" in the specimens of the text 
published in this dissertation (Part II, Sec. II) as sufficient 
proof of the truth of our assertion. 

> See chap. VI. 




From the Bibliotbuque Rationale we selected for our study 
the MSS. designated by F, H, L, M, 0, P. 

1) B. N. Paris. Ar. 12 = F. 

Silvestre de Sacy in the last part of his famous monograph 
on the Samaritan Arabic version of the Pentateuch, cited 
above (Introduction, p. 12, n. 1) says: "J'examinois, pour un autre 
objet, les differens manuscrits Arabes de la Bibliotheque 
nationale qui contiennent des versions des livres de Mo'ise, et je 
cherchois sur-tout a comparer entre eux ceux qui paroissoient 
devoir conteuir la version faite sur le grec des Septante" etc. 
(p. 105). He then continues to say that he hit upon MS. 
Arabic 12 (of course of the "ancien fonds", now MS. Ar. 8), 
which he found to contain the Samaritan Arabic version of 
Abu-Said, supplemented by a Coptic priest from the Hebrew- 
Arabic version of Saadias in behalf and at the expense of an 
opulent Jacobite "teacher" (^a-<), Atia Ibn-Fadl-Allah Abyari'. 
We quote this passage of de Sacy, because it furnishes a clue 
to the probable author of the lengthy note in French found 
on a double fly-leaf im MS. B. N. Ar. 12 of which we are 
now speaking. (We give the anonymous note in Append. I.) 

' DE Sacy, 1. c. p. 113, says: "Le titre de Moallein (»J-«-^ iiiontre que 
c'etoit un laique''. We cannot ascertain on what authority de Sacy 
bases his statement. j_y>UfJ.6 is used in the sense ol' secular, layman; 
f-)-*^, however, in Christian-Arabic Literature is the technical term for 
confessor, just as '>t>-»^" fo"" penitent. Cfr. Fr. ,L Coln, The Nomo- 
canonical Literature of the Copto-Arabic Church of Alexandria (in The 
Ecclesiastical Review, vol. LVI [1917]). pp. 113 — 141 ; particularly p. 126). 

58 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

This MS. containing the Pentateuch in Arabic consists of 
290 folios (l.'J lines a page) and is written in a very beautiful 
hand. The ttxt is pointed completely and pretty accurately. 
The first two pages of Gen. (fol. a*" and 3") bear the following 
couphic inscription in the artistic framework wrought in gold 
and difterent colors which embroiders the pages: il^y ^jj 

J^Vl ^i_wJl ^^j-c JjVl. Similar couphic inscriptions are found 
at the beginning of the other four books (see de Slane's 
Catalogue, p. 4). 

Gen. begins with the words: ^3i>UJ^ ^\ ^^\ <)JJl(^*-o 
In the margin we read: ,>a.Jl o-r^"^' f^^- j^^ J^^' ?><^' ^^r^ 
>^^\ ^35 ^'JSJ\ ^^.p j, 1/1^ "Event ('work') of the first 
day. [To be read) the morning ('at Prime') of Easter Monday. 
Read it also at the Consecration of Churches and on Christ- 
mas" — written by the same hand that wrote the text. The 
same holds true of all the marginal and interlinear variants 
and notes in this MS. 

At the end of Gen. (fol. 71'') is found the colophon: 

In the margin to the right is written in red ink: 

"Here ends the collation with the original and the confrontation 
with the Greek, the Hebrew and the Arabic — in the year 754 
(of the Hegira = 1353 A. D.) in the middle of the month 

According to this epilogue the text of this ^IS. was col- 
lated with the original (J-«jV1). J-«I signifies the underlying 
original text ("Urtext"), in contradistinction to ii-*^-' which 
stands for the copy or model ("Vorlage"') from which a tran- 
script is made. That original text, it would seem, cannot 
have been any otlier than the Coj^tic; for the writer says 

. Part I, amp. Ill 59 

that, besides comparing his (Arabic) text with the Greek, 
the Hebrevif and the (standard) Arabic, he collated it '•with 
the original". We have here an important clue to the na- 
ture of the text found in this MS. and in others of the same 

Exodus commences (fol. 72'') with the words: ^.^JiJ^ <*JJ1 ^-^ 
J,jMl jv^l^L On several pages of this book, v. g. fol. 78* 
and fol. 8P, it says: ^f>-^'^. *-=jL«^3 Ls^.;^sr^^ iLjULc jJj 
j_jiL;^l3 ^\y^\^. Fol. 131'' at the end of Exodus we read: 

\jol U^b AJU. 

Leviticus opens with the invocation (fol. 132''): _j~b-^JI '^ 
JuJLill and ends with the colophon (fol. 175"'): yi~^ ^^ 
cjryo'^ (__Syi j^-« f'^-^ ^^..-05^U^. Similarly the book of Numbers, 
beginning fol. 176'' (JjMl Jil <U)\ ,.--0 concludes fol. 236' 
with this subscription: ^»j i^JJC^Jl iil^yJI ^^ 5^^* yi.^\ J^j 
^5M"\ Jj. ,*.1i yLiJI^ J.>.t^^^,^^ j^jXi >j.i jj-.^ and in the margin 
is written in red ink: \.sx^s^^^ iJ^IX* ^. (;)n Fol. 224 there 
is a long note in the margin 1 supplying an omission from 
Num. 28, 23-29, 5 incl. 

Deuteronomy, called iiUiJl S'^ in the couphic inscription, 
opens fol. 237'' with the words: (»-:^y^ o'-»=^y^ '*^* r~"?- 
Several leaves in this book are in disorder: fol. 242 should 
be placed between 240—241, and fol. 246 belongs between 
244 and 245, so that the correct order of pages is this: 240, 
242, 241, 243, 244, 246, 245, 247. 

Fol. 289'' and 290'' we read these concluding lines: cuXj 

' De Slane and the anonymous writer quoted in Appendix I say 
. that there is a remark by the copyist declaring that he did not find this 
passage in the original, but in the Greek and in the Hebrew. Prof. 
Hyvernat claims, however, in his notes (see above, p. 34, n. 1) 
that this supplement is added ,J-oM\ ^J^s■. It is interesting to note 
that in MS. Vatic. Co\>\.. 1 this whole passage is missing, both in the 
Coptic and Arabic, nor is there any remark whatever that a dilFerent 
text was found in other MSS. or versions. Compare Chap. II, 1. 

60 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

As we consider the text found in this MS. characteristic 
of an entire group, we deem it appropriate to give here in 
consecutive order the beginnings of all the five books of Moses" 

Genesis (fol. 2''): J=>^M1 -luili-^ J='/-'^5 ^w-JI <>JLM ju^ ,>xJ\ ^• 

u.^ ;^\ ^\ ^\;5 ^_j<ji ^bLi ^^)\ ^-s:j ^1 JIS5 »uj\ 

Exodus (fol. 72''): g-c ,^a^ ^^\ ly^i-i ^^j.J-J' J-:^^-'' (.5-4 -eU-^-' »i-* 
jU.U^.\ y>yt^_ ^^.l^Jw*o J-:^j^ ''^^ J-*^5 ^a-U JJf »-«3-:;?^ S-l?"^- 

• L»^ ^--jt.--^.-^ I... a -^ iw-ivii-*-?. u--0^^^;~< \^A ^,^\ ^y'y'^^ g-> . » > 
Leviticus (fol. 132'): ^Is ii>'^3.-iJ\ i^'cr* ^^i i^y^y S-"/" "^^J 

isil4;,-iJ\ ids I >'j jjl <j^X«Lj^ '— >~:^ ^ '■'y'5 ' '^"^^ '■*-?-'' C-~* 

Numbers (fol. 116^): i!ls ^3 \j^^_^ J^^ j. t^^^y <»JU\ ^^ 
(^3^3j^ i-JLill AJ.*vJl j^ j_jjLiJi y^r-^l ^^ f^_ J^i ,1 li^l^j-iJI 
0»f^'. (i"-!:!^ J-r^'r'-'' (_j-^ isUa. i_5'^'^* ^'^ T*^-* J';' c-<-* 
i-u^ cr?-r^ *^~^' *^~* /^ "-^ r^=-^35r^ »^U--j1 JJ^« j.4»^'-sI 

Deuteronomy (fol. 2.57''): 5.;;*^ i^j^y* ^. A^ ^-^^ ^UiJIyb \J^ 

^.^^1 ^' ^^,^i ^yi^\ JiU- ^^^l j c^>S^\ c;^ J J^^r-' 

^y. y^^->^'^ »rrr*~^ ._^J.JI ^'>5^:j*JI« crr^J^ J^y ob^ o^ '^ 
cxe«rV* ^-^ i ^y/ ^^'•' (i' r^^ J-^^ J^^T^ *> ^r^oy- cr* 

That the text in this MS. represents the Septuagint version, 
and not the Hebrew, is beyond doubt (see a number of proofs 

Fart I, Chap. Ill 61 

in the anonymous note, Append. I). In fact the text is identical 
with that found iu the margyi (if MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 (see 
above chap. II, 1). Nay we may even venture the assertion, 
that this Paris MS. v^-as copied from the bilingual MS. just 
mentioned. We shall speak more at length of the relation of 
these MSS. when treating of tlie groups of MSS. in a later 

We do not intend to enter upon the question whether this 
Arabic version was made directly from the Greek or from the 
Coptic, and whether the opinion of the anonymous critic (Ap- 
pend. I) is to be indorsed, when he holds that the ditl'ereuces 
from the Septuagint which we find in our MS. show that this 
translation was made from a Greek text different from ours. 
Nor are we at present concerned with the nature of tlie 
variants, of which de Slahe says that they give the reading 
of the Hebrew text and the signification of certain words (see 
his Catalogue) — both of which statements, it seems to us, must 
be modified considerably. All of these questions require se- 
parate treatment and can be satisfactorily answered only after 
a comparative study of the text of various MSS. (compare 
our text edition. Part II, Sect. II). 

In conclusion, we may remark that the proper names are 
almost always cited according to a Semitic, not a Greek or 
Coptic, original (compare Chap. II, 5, at the end); and that 
the number of sections in Genesis is 47, in Exodus 26, in 
Leviticus 16, in Numbers 35 and in Deuteronomy 18, just as 
in MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 (see above. Chap. II, 1). 

2) 15. N. Paris. Ar. 16 = H. 

If DE Slane says in his Catalogue (p. 4) that the first twenty 
pages of this MS. are by a later hand, this statement needs 
to be formulated more accurately. For in point of fact this 
MS. consists of tliree parts. Fol. 1 — 4 are of recent origin; 
fol. 5 — 20 (also fol. 231 and 232) are older, yet more recent 
than the bulk of the volume. 

On fol. 236^ we read in the colophon that the copyist 

62 The Arabic MSS. of Ute National Library at I'aris 

finished his work on the 23 rd day of Barmhat (Phamenoth) 
954 A. M. = 1238 A. D. Possibly this is the oldest dated 
Arabic MS. of the Pentateuch. Neither place nor name of 
the copyist are given. The precise age of the second oldest 
pai-t of the MS. is hard to determine. On fol. 192'' there is 
a note by a reader. Jacob son of George, dated 1209 A. M. = 
1493 A. D.; but as it is found on the oldest part, it furnishes 
us no definite clue. The first four folios are of a still more 
lecent date. For the guard-leaves fol. 1 and 2 contain the 
rules for calculating the days of the week when some fixed 
feasts fall, viz. New Year's day, Christmas, the Baptism of 
Our Lord (j<>U»», Epiphany); also the number of the Epactae, 
both solar and lunar, and a list of the days of the month on 
which certain movable feasts are celebrated, viz. the ^}f^^ y> 
(the Slaying of the Lamb), the ^^ (most likely the Fast and 
the Pasch of the Ninivites — four days), the f^i) (the Carnival), 
the ,-oi (the Pasch) and the J-^yi ^v^ (the Fast of the 
Apostles). This table extends from the intercalary (iL..^>^) i 
year 1404 A. M. (= 1688 A. D.) to the year 1423 A. M. ( = 
1707 A. D.), and we may reasonably suppose that the scribe 
wrote in the very same year with which he begins his calcu- 

Fol. 3 and 4 (belonging to the most recent part of the 
MS.) comprise Gen. 1, 1—2, 10: fol. 5—20 (the second oldest 
part) contain Gen. 2, 10— 19, 26. 

Fol. 21'' bears in the upper margin a note which is of the 
greatest importance for determining the nature and origin of 
this MS. It says: (?) JIXJl^ cr:^?^^! ^ cr* J^^-'^ '-^ ^^^^ 
k-JDI iwJ ^^_o {?)\j^\^ U^I|I j,. This MS., then, is oriyinally 
a copy from the MSS. of the Melhites. but was completed at 
the beginning and at the end from the copies used by the 

' These rules and tables of feasts are also found on fol. 236''— 239*'. 

2 If this is correct, the word <*■■■>>>._»-•■< must be understood, not of 
the year to which the sixth Epagmnene day is added, but of the year 
immediately following, since 1403, not 1404, was intercalary. 

Part I, Chap. Ill 63 

The fact that this remark is found on the first page of the 
oldest part of the volume, leads one to believe that in the 
opinion of the scribe (it seems to be the same person that 
wrote fol. 5—20) the first twenty folios and folios 231 and 232 
are taken from a Coptic source. As a matter of fact, however, 
fol. 5 — 20 are of a difi'erent type, as we shall see further on, 
and only Gen. 1, 1 — 2, 10 (fol. 3 and 4) are of Coptic origin, 
as may be seen from these specimen lines: v-ij^^J^ <*JJ' (-^•^ 

^j i^yo y^ 3^)^^^ C-oli'^ Jfj'^^S iL,-^\ dJ]\ ,3J-i» i.xJl ^ 

JU^ i\.^\ ^ Jly ^\ ^3_^3 y^\ Jji ^.JJiJl OJIS'^ i^sr* 
j^Jl ^JU\ ^^1^^ ("And light was made" is missing) _>^\ o:^ '^^ 

This text agrees with the one found in MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 
(Chap. Ill, 1), literally with the variants, except for the word 
fL^s^ instead of isjL«.X-^^ (see Part II, Sect. IIj. In con- 
formity with the ordinary usage in Coptic MSS. there is no 
mark showing any division of the text, neither inside of the 
page nor on the margin. 

It is otherwise in the middle-aged part, fol. 5 — 20 (Gen. 
2,10 — 19,26). Here we find the following sections marked 
apparently by the same hand that wrote the text: 

fol. 8»— 2d section (^Lc^^)— Gen. 6,9; 

fol. 13^— 3d section (^Isr^V— Gen. 12,1; 

fol. ITi-— 4th section (*^lji)2_Gen. 18,1. 
There are also some titles in the text referring to the matter 
under them, v. g. at Gen. 5,1; 6,1; !), H; lu, 1. 

The sections indicated in this second oldest part of the 
MS. help us to trace the origin of the version this part con- 


' The scribe had first written d^\S; this he struck out and wrote 


2 On the margin in red ink: f'-o«o^l\. 

64 Tlic Arabic MSK. of the National Library at I'arix 

tains; for they coincide exactly with the Parasliiyj'ot or the 
annual pericopes of the Hebrew Pentateuch '. 

A careful examination of the text of this part shows that 
it is identical with the one found in MS. B. N. Ar. 4. 

As to the true nature of this latter MS. Ar. 4 (aucien 
fonds 3) opinions are divided. Thus de Slane (Catalogue, p. 2) 
thinks it to be a Samaritan text; de Sacy^ is quite positive 
that it contains the text of the Septuagint^. For the sake 
of comparison we here give the beginnings of the five books 
of the Pentateuch according to this MS. Ar. 4, from which 
it will appear that the text was translated from the Hebrew 
or the Syriac, and that it bears a more or less close resem- 
blance to the renowned MS. Ar. 1 of Paris (from which chiefly, 
if not solely, is derived the text of the Pentateuch in the Paris 
and London Polyglots) and to MS. Leyden Cod. 377 Warner, 
published by De Lagarde in his "Materiahen zur Gesch. und 
Kritik des Pent. I", Leipzig 1867. 

Genesis (fol. S--"): OJU^ Jf>J^)\^ ..U-^\ <jJJ\ j).:L L. J^l 

,^1 ^\ ^l;5 ;yJl ^IS^ j^J\ ^^^ ^\ Jli-^ Ul ^5 J* 

• Compare Ginsburo, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, London 1897, 
p. 66. 

2 In a note on page 67 of bis "Mt'iuoire" Ljuoted above ("Intro- 
duction", page 12, note 1). 

' On a fly-leaf at the beginning of the MS. an anonymous writer 
has put the following note: 

Pentateucbus Arabious ex antiijua uec plane cum vulgatis consentiente 
interpretatioue quae videtur ad coJicps Judaicos vel Syriacos potius ijuam 
ad Graecos iacta. 

Praefatio de tratlita Judacis lege deque traditione successiva secundum 
quam ad eos ad ultima usque tempora pervenerit multa habens iis siniilia 
quae in eandem sententiam habentur apud .Tudaeorum magistros in libro 
Pirke Abbotli, Maimonide etc. 

Codex antii]uus et bonae uotae cum adjunctis adnotatiouibus quae 
plerumque ad niysticos Scripturae sensus aut quaedam doctrinao christi- 
anae capita referuntur. 

Fart I, Chap. Ill 65 

Exodus (fol. 33''): \^> ^>J1 J^l^l ^_^ U--1 sJ^a^ 
C>^**-^J J-^i) '^^^ J^'5 f-<3-^ i-^J ^ S-l?-^- S'' J-^^ ci' 

Leviticus (fol. 57-'j: ^sr^--' l^ ^^ a^IjL^ Kj^y° ^^^ ^^i 

Numbers (fol. 73"): ^:Jl-*3Ml aJj ^ LL;^ ^^L ^k i_3-^^'« -^ill ,J^ 
J^l^l l_j.o l_5=>-_j^ M i-JLLII ix^ jj i^i-^' yy-^\ o-* ?y. J3* (3 

Cjy^} ^4j)6l.«XI J.^jlj.-*il ,_yO >J^ft I ^*»<a.l i*,J ijlsj y^^ Jpj^ i^_y» 

CU> J^ L^ *J^ O^-r^ O-?' Cr* j^^ ^ jy^j^U^l j^ju (,,4j5bl 

Deuteronomy: ,^ i^^y Ur? (^ o-^* Otd^lsr^-'^ si-a 

.*4y^l <JO <jJJl !i_xil U-> 

Comparing the three texts in question we uiay draw up 
the following comparative table: 

B. N. Ar. 1 B. N. Ar. 4 Leyd. Cod. 377 

Different Genesis Similar 

Different Exodus Identical 

Identical Leviticus Different 

Different Numbers Identical 

Identical Deuteronomy Different 

Thus MS. Ar. 4 agrees with Leyd. Cod. 377 in Gen., Exod., 
Numbers, and with MS. Ar. 1 in Levit. and Deuter. 

Of the Leyden codex De Lagaede says in his preface (1. c. 
p. IV) that Genesis and Exodus are made from the Hebrew 
and represent the Saadias' version, Leviticus, Numbers and 
Deuteronomy, however, from the Syriac (but not from the 

BuODE, Arabic Pentateuch in tlie Cliurob of Egypt. 5 

66 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

As to the real nature of the text found in MS. B. N. Ar. 1 
(or more precisely, ou the Arabic Pentateuch version of the 
Paris and London Polj-glots) much was written in former 
times ', and even in oiu- day the question can hardly be said, 
in the writer's opinion, to have been decided scientifically and 
definitely. It is generally admitted that MS. Ar. 1 contains 
the version of Saadus. But there is much conflicting manu- 
script material that requires careful sifting, before it can be 
safely decided whether the text found in the Polyglots is the 
real Saama^*' text, or a revision made by some Hebrew or 
Christian scholar, or perhaps even a mixture of several Arabic- 
Hebrew or Arabic-Samaritan recensions. 

Certain it is, however, that the text in the MSS. mentioned 
is not the Samaritau-Arabic version, nor is it made from the 
Septuagint, but from the Hebrew. 

These remarks were deemed necessary in order to give the 
reader a fair idea of the nature of the version of MS. B. N. 
Ar. 4, from which the second-oldest part of MS. Ar. 16 of 
which we are treating has been taken. 

And it is further to ,be observed that the numerous cor- 
rections written between the lines and on the margin of the 
oldest portion of MS. Ar. 16 are taken from this (Ar. 4) 
version. On the other hand, w'e notice on the margin of 
MS. Ar. 4 a number of corrections or variants in Carshunic 
taken from the version found in the oldest part of MS. Ar. 16; 
V. g. fol. 53* (Ex. 35,11) the word <JJilki, corresponding to 
the Hebrew I'DlpTlN (taches) is interpreted: ooa^laao = It^^^i}^^ 
of MS. Ar. 16. 

Fol. 20'' we read in the space below the text at the bottom 
of the page: 3j^^ ij* cr^^^^i ij,>U.I s'lJiJl ^y^. LJL* ^^^ 
1*.xju ^SJ\. "And from here is read tlie thirty-first lesson 
on the leaf following." Fol. 21* follows the title: 31st lection, 
and tlieu it says: J\ li^ ^l^^ciXll ^-Jls ,_yXJ\ ^^ ^_j» \JSa. 

' Compare "Introduction", page 12, note 1. Also P. Kahle, Die 
arabischeu Bibelubersetzungen, Leipzig 1904, p. VII— -XI. 

Part. I, Chap. Ill 67 

"Thus in all the copies which 'the Christian' commented". Here 
the oldest part of the MS. begins (fol. 21—230, 232 — 238). In 
the margin the same hand that wrote the second-oldest part 
of the MS. seems to have added the so-called j-;^-«-»J" (com- 
mentary, exhortation), possibly from MS. B. N. Ar. 11, under 
the rubric i>JjUw (note, postscript), followed by the words: 
Jli-Jl J Is, or -JLa-Jl ^i\yQjJ\ J Is. Fol. 59'' Exodus begins 
and ends on fol. 108''. Fol. IDS'" contains only nine lines, the 
rest of the page having been left blank. The text takes up 
again on fol. 106*. This break occurs at Exodus 39,8. Le- 
viticus extends from fol. 109'' to fol. 145'', Numbers from 146'' 
to 192'-, Deuteronomy from 193* to 236 ^ 

Genesis and Exodus in this oldest part are divided into 
lections (s-elyi) for the time of Lent and some feast days. 
Genesis comprises 57 lections, Exodus 20. These liturgical 
indications are almost without lacuna. They are written by 
the same hand that wrote the text of the bulk of the volume. 
In Exodus, especially, these remarks are interesting in as 
much as they mention the Egyptian names of the months, 
V. g. fol. 60'' at the fourth lection we find the rubric: "to be 
read on the feast of the Annunciation tind on the 29 th Barm- 
hat", fol. 76-' we read: "on the 17th Thoth and the feast of 
the Baptism, ^_yjlk»". 

Leviticus, too, is divided into lections, thirteen in number, 
marked in the text. Numbers shows in the text the sectional 
divisions called Jy«as, in all twenty-two (some, however, are 
not indicated). 

We have already remarked, that in Gen. 2, 10 — 19, 26 
(the second oldest part of the MS.) we find in the text the 
indication of three J-s^^, that correspond exactly to the 
Parashiyyot of the Hebrew Text '. In like manner we find in 

• Fol. 231'' and 232* bear no indication of section or diWsion of any 
kind at Deuter. 32, 1 (Paraehah 53), although they are written by the 
same hand that wrote fol. 5 — 20, and might, therefore, be expected to 
show at this place the sign _l3a.^o\ or iJ^\^. 

68 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

the maigin of Exodus six _ls^\ indicated (from the 6th to 
the 11th; the 9th is not expressed but only marked by red 
dots in tlie margin and a red line under the first words) 
corresponding again exactly to the Parashiyyot. Turning to 
MS. Ar. 4 from which, as already stated, MS. Ar. 16 has 
evidently been supplemented and corrected, we find that Genesis 
is divided into twelve As^\ and Exodus into eleven ^1-^^^, 
tliat are, too, just like the I'arashiyyot of the Hebrew Bible. 
Leviticus and Numbers in Ms. Ar. 4 are, however, divided 
into twenty-eight and thirty-six _ls^\ respectively, not, indeed, 
equal in length to the Hebrew Parashiyyot, but corresponding 
exactly to the sections (_lsr°l) which we find in tlie margin 
of Leviticus and Numbers in MS. Ar. 16, marked by the 
same hand that wrote the middle-aged portion of this remark- 
able MS. 

And as in MS. Ar. 4 there are no sections at all in 
Deuteronomy, so also we find no division whatever indicated 
in the margin of MS. Ar. 16; nor is there any lection (s-tlyi) 
■or section (J-«as) marked within the text of Deuteronomy, and 
only one title is written in the margin, viz. fol. 234'': iS^i \j.* 
^_^^, "this is the blessing of Moses". 

To enable the reader to compare the text of IMS. B. N. 
Ar. 12 and its group as well as that of MS. B. N. Ar. 4 with 
the version represented by MS. B. N. A. v. 16, we place here 
the beginnings of the books of the Pentateuch according to 
the latter MS., exclusive, however, of Genesis, which, as was 
stated above, is of later date in its first nineteen chapters. 

Exodus (fol. m''): \^> ^^^.JJI S^\y^\ ^ U—l ^M^L* 

\_ji^> <^-^ J-*S H="^ J^=>.l^ J^ <>4r^^ ' >S)^-^. &-* x"^^ i_y^' 

Tjeviticus (fol. 109"): ii.>Ug.~iJl iJXs j^^ <)^^^ ^.s^y* ^^ '^^5 

li\ fi-J^ J^^\ Jj ^ (sic) J^j J^^lj--* or^ (^ -sJ J^S 

r^b o'j^* cr* f^^'/ c^^L:^ fi>Ur^> cr* ^J^.f s^yj s-y 

Part J, Chap. Ill 69 

Numbers (fol. 14(;''): 1-^^ )^ *j^ ^_;9 i^^^ vy* f^? 
i_)L^a- J.iL <*.J Jls^ ^^.<i-! J=jl ^^ J-Ol^-^1 ^_j-o j5^ cr* 

Deuteronomy (fol. 193"): J.-.5\^l ^x^ ,^-^y *-"^" Jy^* *-^ 

J, ^J.J> ^Ls"^ IJl=^ ^3^ Jl 7-»'-«' J-=- (J> '-r^.j-?^ ^^ "^-J^- r^ 
,__y--j^ ^ ^^.^ j,^j J^\ j_jia ^.^ ^>U.l j.<3..J:..J\ j, j;j..*»i^l <^X^ 

That we are dealing with an Egyptian MS. or, at least, 
with one that was used in the Church of Egypt is beyond 
all doubt. The dating according to the era of the Martyrs, 
the names of the months in the colophon fol. 236" (Barmhat) 
and in a number of rubrics (v. g. Exodus 15,22, fol. 76-' "to 
be read on the 17th Thoth"; Exodus 41, 1, fol. 107'' "to be 
read on 25th Athyr"), the Arabic-Coptic numerals used to 
designate the number of stichoi at the end of Genesis— all 
these by the same hand that wrote the oldest portion of the 
MS. — give certain proof that we have before us a manuscript 
of the Church of Egypt (Melkite Branch, see above in this 
paragraph), and most likely one that was used for liturgical 

Reserving for another chapter (VII, B, 1) a summarized 
discussion of the rubrics and liturgical notes found in our 
MS., it only remains to list some of the sub-titles given in the 
text of Numbers under the indication of the section {^J-<^) 
and sometimes even taking the place of any other mark of 
division. Thus we find: 

Num. 5, 8 -:— iAi> Lil ,_ji* i,L^, law concerning trespassing; 
„ 5, 11 — isj-^-aJl ^-^.^j law of rancor, jealousy (?); 

70 Thf Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

Num. 6, 1 - cU..wJ\ a-Uj. tlie law of asceticism; 

„ 6, 22 — OiiyJl ilw IJofc, this is the law of the 

n 7, 1 — ^J-JI o'-J^^^^ »->-J«>. this is the beginning 
(initiation, dedication?) of the altar; 
in the margin: LU-^j'^l ^^j ,;^lJi, offer- 
ings of the chiefs of the tribes; 

„ 8, 1 — rj**^' i-U^c. law of the lamps; 

„ 9, 1 — -^aiJl ij.^, law of the pasch; 

„ 15.17 — ^-La^ J>j\ j, ^^^\riJ\ is^, law of offer- 
ings (to be made) in the Land of Canaan; 

„ 15,37 — ■t'^^' aLLw, law of the tassels; 

„ 19, 1 — _ ^ .tjK";.M AJ.«o, law of jturification; 

„ 19,14 — <>jJLil^\ j. 0*-»^\ ,jr^ <>J-^. law concerning 
one who dies in his dwelling-place (tent?); 

„ 20, 1 — UJ> ysr^, the rock of water; 

„ 20,23 — c>S/^ z^y^- ''^•^'^^ of Aaron; 

„ 26,57 — ^>.4^^^j>3 cy^.j^' ■''^ ''^i this is the number 
of the Levites and their families; 

„ 31, 8 — f^^ ^*-*-* '^*'-*5' iind these are the names 
of their kings; 

„ 33, 1 — fj,^i.^\^^ J^\y^\ j_y;j rij^ '-^5) and this 
is the departure of the sons of Israel, and 
their stations. 

3) B. N. Paris. Ar. <J = L. 

This beautifully written MS. contains the entire Pentateuch, 
according to the same version that is found in the oldest part 
of MS. B. N. Ar. 16. but without any commentary. There 
are hardly any marginal notes, and the few that are found 
are nothing else than words or phrases omitted by the scribe 
through oversight when copying his MS. 

But, even so, there are prtrts missing in several places; 
V. g. Gen. 5,13, the first half of the verse is lacking owiug to 
the scribe's confounding the J^y)L^r^ at the end of verse 12 

Part I, Chap. Ill 71 

aucl in the middle of verse 13. It seems that this codex was 
copied from a liturgical MS. but that the writer omitted the 
indications of the lections and the so-called j.y-.J^. For at 
times the introductory ^, omitted at the beginning of a new 
lection in a liturgical codex, is also missing in our MS., and 
at the beginning of Chap. XVITI of Gen. we read: Aill yi^y 
^►.-ji^M, instead of <*J, as the Scriptural text says, just as the 
liturgical MSS. taking up a new lection at this place had to 
insert the proper name instead of the pronoun. 

This original MS. cannot have been MS. B. N. Ar. 10 (see 
next paragraph), because Ar. 9 contains passages which are 
lacking in Ar. 10, v. g. Gen. .5, 25. Possibly it was MS. B. N. 
Ar. 16 in its original state; for, whereas the latter MS. is 
dated 1238 A. D., as said above, the former was completed 
in the second Rabi'a of the year 683 of the Hegira = A. 
D. 1283. 

Genesis begins on tol. 1''. In the original pagination in 
Copto- Arabic ciphers this is fol. 3''; and both foliations are 
completely carried through the volume with this discrepancy 
of two pages. The introduction to the first book of Moses is 
rather elaborate, written in six lines. We read: 

*.J\) \ dJy>.^ ^^X^ (J, v^) \ |<>->.->^ \ <^JJ I />-*<-^-» 

"In the name of God, the Ancient, the Eternal. We begin 
witli the help of God, who made known to His friends His 
creative works and his laws, to write the Five Booke of Moses, 
the greatest of the Prophets. Book First. Book of the Creation 
of the World." 

Each page contains thirteen lines, and on the top of the 
page in the centre the number of the chapter found on that 
page is marked, in our Arabic numerals. Wherever a new 
chapter begins, this is indicated by a vertical line drawn 
between the last word of the preceding chapter and the tirst 

72 T)ie Arabic MSS. of the Kational Library at Paris 

of the following one. Otherwise there is no division, section 
or lection mark in the whole book of Genesis or in the other 
four books. Only at Deuteronomy 33, 1 do we find the remark: 
"this is the blessing of Moses", just as in Ar. 16— whicii con- 
firms our opinion that MS. 9 must liave been copied from a 
liturgical codex, the r-;^— iJ' and the titles having been omitted. 

The text, as has already been said, is exactly like that in 
Ar. 16. But as the latter is defective in its first pages and 
shows a "Coptic" beginning of Genesis, we deem it opportune 
to add here the first verses of Genesis from MS. Ar. 9, so 
that a complete set of opening verses of the different books, 
as represented by the group to which MS. Ar. 16, Ar. 9 and 
others belong, may find a place in our work. (See this Chapter, 2.) 

Genesis: _^ J>J^\ cuilS, J'^^JI^ ^U-Jl iJ^\ jX^ J5MI ^ 

J^\_5 ^^^ ^^\ J. <U)\ ^^ j^\ ^1^3 ^^\ ^^ i^\ Jli-^ 
^IS'^ ^LJ LftU; k^)i^\^ ULv> jy^\ ,^>i ^..^Ikll^ y^\ ^^ dJ}\ 

.^X^.l« a^^ _.L..>0 /^v^3 «Lm.wC 

As to the nature of the version found in this MS. de 
Slake (Catalogue, p. 3) says it is made from the Septuagint. 
Doubtless, there is much similarity lietween this text and the 
Septuagint version. Thus, to mention only one point, the age 
of the Patriarchs at the time when they begot their first born 
(V. Chap, of Gen.) is given according to the Greek, except in 
the case of Lamech (v. 28), who is said to have been 182 years 
old when he begot Noe, in conformity with the Hebrew text, 
as against the Septuagint, which assigns him 188 years. We 
cannot here enter into the details of this intricate and inter- 
esting subject. Suffice it to call attention to the paradoxical 
fact, that although the text ajjpears to be substantially that 
of the Greek version', the order of ciiapters and verses is, 

• Yet we must say that in quite a few instances, especially with 
regard to the proper names, the text represents a Hebrew original, or 
rather, yet more accurately, the Syriac version. Compare, for instance, 
the first verses of Deut., esjjecially Lilj^ f^j — i''-ss»» V-"'' (,'• 6- Kadesh- 
barnea, in v. 2). 

Part I, Chap. Ill 73 

undoubtedly, that of the Hebrew Bible'. Thus in Gen. 31, 
46- 51 (fol. 50'' and 50'') we read: \y-,^\ ^^Isr^V ^^i*i. JUi 

i^b"^ L(bLi^« i-'i^ ULsiL Lis" 1 5 ^k-oK L*^,--»ai« 'ijisr^ l^.»,s* isjls.^- 
^b'il <^J Jli'^ ''l^ljiX^ i^L^^Ij IaU-voI i_jyLso^ !S>L<3-iJI i^U 
UUo^ ^IaX^j. laU-^ i^JJ-Jj f^-J' '-'■-^5 (_y^? is\>.Alij i^t^Jl sj..* 
Sycl j!j Jr^-^ '->'^ ^-^^3 U-^-T:^ '*^-'-'* S^--^. J'-* ''jg^-WJI .=tvs:'l 
i-U\ .liil U^ £J43.-^.U S.s^^ )i^ c.y' '■'^ i^^-"-' '^O* <*.-^a.l^ J-W.4 

a) the Hebrew n»bj — b) nsSIp, watch-tower — c) Hebrew: 10«M 
3f>»;;^ pb, Syriac: aQ.&:^A. ^^ f»lo. 

Similarly in Gen. 35, 16— 21, and also Exodus 20, 13— 15, 
Exodus 35,8—19, Exodus 36, 8-40, 32, of which we quote the 
opening lines: iliJl JL»b\ "jl^..^^ i—j^XiJl (sicjl^^SL^ J-:^-*^ jX^is 

^.a'-t^J I *.>j^li>. j^ llL |^_jy* Vji l^i^s^ LsiX) r=>-"^' 13^^"^^ v_r^-»-=^' 

.JXilS^ jiL^Jl i3-°-"'^' i3 i3t^^' ^i->i^J\ ci,-..XoU^ (_j !!• ft j^,^..^.^.o-i.» !!«,» 

a) Throughout tliis passage the verb is put in the plural, as in the 
Syriac, against the Hebrew. The text itself difl'ers considerably from the 

Again in Numbers 1, 24-37; 6, 22-26; 26, 15-47. 

Nevertheless it is but fair to remark that in the beginnings 
of Exodus, Levit., Numbers and especially of Deuteronomy 
which we have cited from MS. Ar. 16 (see above, Chap. Ill, 2) 
the text shows decided discrepancies from the Septuagint 
reading. Would reference to the Syro-hexaplar and to its 

' Comi]. Swete's Introd. to the Old Test, in Greek, Cambridge 1900, 
p. 231 sqq. 

- See Field's Origenis Hexaploruni ([uae supersunt, Oxonii 1875, the 
note at the end of the 36th Chap, of Exodus, Tom. 1, p. 150. 

74 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

Arabic translation (MSS. Bodl. Libr. Land. or. 243 and Laud, 
or. 2.58). perhaps, furnish a clue to a plausible explanation ot 
these phenomena ' ? 

4) B. N. Paris. Ar. 10 = M. 
This MS. containing the Pentateuch, with the same y-^f'j^ 
inserted between the text that is found on the margin of MS. 
B. N. Ar. 16, is not complete in its original script. The first 
page has l)een supplied by a later hand and from a text 
heterogeneous to the rest of the MS. Genesis begins fol. l*" 
with the invocation of the Trinity: ^^^^ c^^'^i >— '"^* r-*^ 
u — o *S^^ ^;_,,** <>>JU\ ^^, j^j.JOJ j^^\^ (sic) i^\ |y>jJJ\ 
^^j^\ Ll^ ^^j'. ,_5^' ^i^ ^^oJ-iLJl ii'\^_j;Jl and the first 
thirteen verses of Chap. I, in a translation difiering somewhat 
from that of any other MS. mentioned, as is evidenced by the 
first lines: ^^ J>)^\ C-Jls^ JfJ^'^i '..♦-c^\ <>JJ> ,_3i;». *j^\ ^ 

iJ]\ ^^^ LU.>s^ ^,^1 d<U\ ^W^ ^»>J\ J6^ \^y ^XJ AiJl JU;^ 

In fact, however, four pages were missing; and as only one 
has been replaced, there is a lacuna from Gen. 1,13 to Gen. 
2, 21: J-«^3 ^U-il J.^1 S^\^ f'-^i li'L-^ fi\ J.S. <UJ\ ^U 
<»JwX> Ui, which is the second verse of tlie sixtli lection. 
The modern foliation did not take account of this gap, and 
hence there is a difference of three between the old Copto- 
Arabic and the later European numbering of the pages (thus 
2" = 5^ 17" = 20" in the original paging). 

There is another lacuna between fol. 53 and 54, extending 
from fol. 57 (old foliation) to fol. 64 (old foliation) inclusively, 
which covers the end of Genesis, beginning with the 67 th 
lection, and the beginning of Exodus almost to the end of the 
6 th lection (the 7 th lection begins at Exodus 6, 14). 

Accordingly, Exodus begins on fol. 54" (64" old pagination) 
with the last two words of Ex. 6, 6: "Judiciis magnis". 

' See Hastings. Dictionary of tlie Bible, IV. p. 447' and p. 659. 

Part I, Chap. Ill 76 

There are a number of variants in the margin, inti'oduced 
now and then by the title: ^^^1 is-^-* ^i,■, but the writinf^, 
ta'lik ou the whole, in these notes and in fact throughout the 
MS. is rather poor and indistinct. 

The other three books bear the profession of faith in the 
Divine Trinity, and are called by the same names as in MS. 
Ar. 16: Leviticus (fol. 89'') c^.^\ y^, Numbers (fol. 12n«) 

and in the colophon (fol. 153'') it is called ^j^»; for there we 
read: ^ ^j^\y^\ ,_y-o >^t. ^a^ sl^^xJl ^^ ^?>r" yL^l J_»^ 

*_j' j43-w ^j_;xi ^>L«^JI^ ^^jO)!^ AJi,*o t_aJl .*.X.»<i |^-^*<^ r*"^ J^Jli 

sblk^^. According to this note the MS. was finished on 
Monday the 19 th day of Sayual of the year 730 (of the Hegira) 
which corresponds to the 13 th Mesori of the year 104() (of 
the Martyrs) = A. D. 1330; and it is added "on the 6th day 
of the month Ab", so that we have the Moslem, the Coptic 
and the Syriac dating on this manuscript. 

Deuteronomy, too, bears the same exceptional title that is 
given this book in MS. Ar. 16: iiUiJI y^^, and at the end 
(fol 177'') we notice the colophon joMl J,l U^b xi} ■^^^^^ 
(3 ^jL.iiy^ sjLi^l ^j^.^:^^ xU\ ^^}■^ '*-?.;>^* J-»^ here we expect 
the date; but the scribe, possibly to look up the exact date 
of the month, broke off abruptly, and, being, perhaps, detained 
by some unforeseen circumstance, omitted through forgetfulness 
to return to his work. Another hand (the reviser's?) has 
added immediately below : . . . (Jl r^^^ j^-^jJI t_->U5Ul IJob ^i, jJlL 
sblkiL ^\y-^ ■ ■ ■ ^M ^-"b 3 J'-^. y^i "The humble servant 
examined this book up to . . . [perhaps iyL\ "its end''?J and 
he asks every one who applies himself to . . . (the study of 
the same) ... [to pray?] for the pardon of his sins". 

5) B. N. Paris. Ar. 11 = 0. 
This MS. shows many of the characteristics of MS. B. N. 
Ar. 16. As in the latter, a considerable part of the original 

76 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

MS. is lost. Fol. 1 — 19 are of recent date'; the verso of fol. 19 
is left blank. The older portion of the MS. contains the same 
text, the same liturgical notes and the same j-:^*-^' that are 
found in MS. Ar. 10 and Ar. 16 (where the ^~>ij" is put in 
the margin). Twenty-four folios of the original script had 
perished; but as the repairer supplied this lacuna from a text 
without commentary, there is now a difference of five between 
the old Copto-Arabic and the modern foliation. Almost 
twenty-one chapters of Gen. are lacking of the old text: for 
tol. 20'' (Copto-Arabic 25'')— the original portion of the MS. 
begins fol. 20" — we find the indication of the 33rd lection 
(5th Friday of Lent), i, e. Gen. 22, 1. Fol. 35 has also been 
replaced by a new sheet of paper, which, however, remained blank. 
The same repairing hand is seen fols. 52—63, the end of 
Genesis and the beginning of Exodus. One leaf between the 
two books is left entirely blank. Fol. 63" Exodus is intro- 
duced with the title: 'i\jy^i\ ,^ i^L^' _;•*-- y>5 r^*^' r*-*^ 

It is interesting to note how this title and also the text 
on the recent pages of Exodus agree with MS. Ar. 4; whilst 
the beginning and end of Geuesis, supplied by the same hand, 
are taken from a different source. 

Fol. 64", Ex. 2, 5, where the old part begins, we find the 
liturgical note: "second day of Passion "Week in the evening", 
iust as in MS. Ar. 10; and the text, too, agrees perfectly with 
the latter, except that at times Ar. 11 has a faulty reading 
(or a slight variant) where Ar. 10 has the ordinary and more 
correct term; viz. Ex. 6, 16 Ar. 10 writes ^_y<--^. Ar. 11 ,,7^-;^. 
Fol. «7 (blank), 88 and 89 are also recent. 

At the end of Exodus, fol. Ill*' (old part) we are told that 
the scribe finished his work on the 22nd Du-'l-ka'da of the 

1 First verses of Gen.: Cj'->5 *U-»J* O*^ <*>^t 3^^ i3>^' (3 
<JkS\JU\ ^^ AlJJiJl^ ii'J.i>..'.»...« y-^^ lu^xi-* -^ iJv"^' Colfj Jfj"^^ 

■ 'UJl ^ Jf <UI1 ^^j^ 

Part I, Chap. Ill 77 

year 731 (of the Hegira), the 24th Mesori of the year 1047 

of the Martyrs (1331 A. D.), the 16th Ah (Compare this 

Chapter, 4, towards the end): ,_y>l-iJl (sic) J.^^ yi~^\ J^i 

^>l.^a liXA,-»ixJLI ^^jO)l» rfiji.,/^,vo2 I iul i^.,^ j^_.w-< ^j_yj _-.;xj>.J 1^ 

As in MS. B. N. Copt. 1 (see above, Chap. II, 3) and in 
MS. B. N. Ar. 16 (paragraph 2 of this chapter), so also in the 
older portion of this manuscript the words Jls or ^^i intro- 
ducing a speech of God to Moses or to the people are written 
in red ink. 

Leviticus, fol. 112" (old part) begins with the invocation 
of the Blessed Trinity, and the text, divided into lections, is 
exactly like Ar. 10 (and Ar. 16). Fol. 137 and 138 have been 
inserted later. The thirteenth lection (Chap. 25, 1) bears the 
sub-title J=;M1 cxj-^ i^vo, and at Cliap. 26, 1 there is a note 
saying: "from here to be read on New Year's day" (compare 
Chap. IV, 2: MS. K). We also find a few lines of com- 
mentary interspersed here and there in this book, but sparsely, 
just as in Leviticus in MS. Ar. Ki -and MS. Pocock. 219 
(Chap. IV, 2). The colophon (just like in Ar. 10) speaks of 
this "scanty" tafsir, fol. 149'': ^i-^ ^a^ cuJ^l ji.^\ J^ 
!i_^.»«-a.j ^^y<ij.^S Lo^ j^^o^NUl. Then follows the customary praise 
of God and a petition to pray for the poor sinful scribe. 

Numbers (fol. 150-' — old pag.) begins the same way as in 
MS. Ar. 10. There are only some very slight variants in the 
text, V. g. Num. 1, 3 ^J^ U, instead of 3y ij}- 

The book is divided into chapters (J.^); we also again 
meet the numerous sub-titles, 'Jj^^, which we have noticeJ 
when speaking of MS. Ar. 16. 

Of Deuteronomy the first three folios are new. This ex- 
plains the difference in title fi-om that by which the fifth book 
of Moses is called in the other MSS. of this group: k'^Ul ^j.^ 
^_,^^lil ^a^ ix.^J\, whereas in the other MSS. it is styled: 

78 The Arabic MSS. of the National Library at Paris 

'i'-JJiJ\ ji— ). Fol. 191—195 arc all that remains of the original 
text of Deuteronomy (there is no sign of any division in this 
part). All the rest of the book is of recent origin, and the 
text differs in many little points, though not very considerably, 
from that of MS. Ar. 10 and Ar. 16. Jla and ^ are here, 
too, written in red. The book ends with a short colophon, 
without separation from the last verse of the text, testifying 
that it was finished Tubeh 25th, 1316 A. M. (1600 A. D.): 

(^\S^ ,0)1 U>)^. ^^jUriJl *l.M»-iwM ATiT a<^^ Sy^\ bj^ ^,4^ 
J\. Then follows the name of the donator, hut it has been 
erased and replaced by another, which cannot be deciphered. 
The colophon ends with an invocation of the Blessed Virgin 
and the Evangelist St. Mark. 

6) B.N.Paris. Ai-. 18 = P. 

This MS. contains only the Book of Genesis with a lengthy 
commentary. The text, both in the older and later (such as 
fol. 1-9, 229-250) portions of the MS. is identical with 
that of MSS. B. N. Ar. 9. 10, 16. Only the first verse differs: 
^ J>J^\ cJir^ J=.jV\ Ob_5 ^U — II Ob <OJ\ jX=L ^j^\ j, 

^UJI 3^ V_9J> <>JJ\ _5j^ AjS~' JiyS <*«»lkJI^ sJoCL*.^ ^« ii.yh .' <l 

(compare MS. Ar. 11). Then follows the heading: ^.;^«».^iJJ\ 
and the commentary on the two verses goes on for about a 
page and a half. Fol. 3* the Scripture text continues, intro- 
duced by the title: i_jUXJI. After three verses of text comes 
the next "tafsir"; then on fol. 20" the sixth verse of Genesis is 
taken up. All of which reminds the writer very strongly of MS. 
Bodl. Libr. Marsh. 440 (see below. Chap. IV, 3). In fact the divi- 
•sion of the text, the words i_jl^^l (^KaS^) and j---~ixH (-.-.^kwi 
the first words of the commentary ^J.^1 ^_j»ojJUl (■ "■'^ ■"-, -'^j 
and its length seem to point to the conclusion ' that we have 

> Since we liave only parts of MS. 18 at our disposal, we are unable 
to establish our conclusion with certainty. 

Part /, Chap. HI 79 

in MS. Ar. 18 substantially the same text and the commentary 
of St. Ephrem, which MS. Marsh 440 contains in Carshunic. 
As the identity of the text of MS. Ar. 18 with that of MS. 
Ar. 16 is beyond doubt, de Slane's statement, that the version 
found in Ar. 18 is made from tlie Peshitto, has been suffi- 
ciently discussed above (Chap. Ill, 2j when treating of the 
nature of the version found in MS. B. N. Ar. 16. 

It may be asked whether the inscription (fol. T') claiming 
this to be the version of the "I'enowned Abu-'l Barakat" (t.jLxS' 
i-Jl CJ6yJ\ ^_5J^) isl.ydl ^^ J*i"^' yA.^\) deserves any 

credit. As it is found on the part added later to the original 
MS., we may well doubt its genuineness. The verso of the 
guard-leaf at the beginning of the book l)ears a note by a 
reader(?) with the date 10:^4 of the Martyrs (A. D. 1307/8). 
It would seem, then, that the original MS. belongs to the 13 th 
century. The latter portion of the book (fol. 329 — 353) is of 
still later origin; in fact, the pages of this part are not all 
written by the same hand nor are they of the same date. 
At the end of the book (fol. 348 "■) the scribe tells us that the 
text is said to comprise 4600 stichoi, just as in MS. B. N. Ar. 16; 
i_aVTiju^l ^^1 lisA^3 ^ J'-J^j is'^^l ^f^ J«i"^* ,-a-^l J.^S' 

j.^_ is:***-> (but, alas, no date is given "when he finished copying", 
the rest of the line left blank!) ^^)\ (Jl \^\ L^\> <UJ ^/^^^ 




Of the numerous Arabic manuscripts of the Pentateuch at 
the Bodleian Library we have selected four only for special 
study — those designated by E, K, X, X. 

1) liodl Libr. Laud. or. 272 = E. 

This magnificent Ar. MS. formerly known as Laud. A 182 
was used by Holmes and Parsons in their famous edition of 
the Greek Old Testament (it is cited there as Arab. 3). The 
author of this translation of the Pentateuch is not mentioned; 
the :MS. was written in the year 1064 A. M. (1347/8 A. D). 
The pages are numbered with the simple Arabic (not European) 
numerals; the last is 235. 

The first thirteen pages contain a preface about the Law 
given to Moses by God, handed down from age to age through 
the Prophets and High-priests and preserved througli all 
vicissitudes and the many wars in which the Jews were in- 
volved, down to the time of Annas and Caiphas. 

The text begins fol. 7'' with the introduction: <>JJ1 (.-wj 

AjLJiiLl ^i-^ ^_«. To the left of iiLAil, a little lower, there 
stands a word wliicli we take to be n'C^sna in Hel)rew cursive 
characters. Something similar seems to be the case on fol. 55% 
Genesis 47, 28. 

There are properly no divisions of the text The first 
section called r-^^^^ which is rather surprising, is not followed 
by any other section mark in Genesis; this is also the case 
in the othei three books (Ex., Levit., Deut.), which begin with 
the J^"^*. J-^, 110 other Jj-vai follow. Numbers has not even 


Part I, Chap. IV 81 

this one indication of a chapter- the text begins immediately 
after the title of the book. Yet it is worthy of mention that 
in the Hexaemerou, after the work of a day has been described, 
the closing verse is written each time in larger characters and 
in a separate line. We notice a similar phenomenon at Gen. 2,4 

(fol. 9"): Jpj'^->^} ^U^l XiiiL I iUJ \S.a,. After that it occurs 

but very rarely that, when there is a change of subject in the 
text, about one line is written in larger characters. 

All notes, interlinear or marginal, whether in blue or red 
or black ink, seem to be of the same hand as the text. The 
reason for the diversity of inks is not apparent. The notes 
and variants in this manuscript ai'e not very numerous; some- 
times they supply omissions in the text or make a correction, 
at other times they indicate the contents, v. g. fol. 12'' i-ciii 
^^^Ls^kJ \ ; generally they are of a liturgical character v. g. fol. 7 '' 
Gen. 1, 1: >'^-y^i\ ^.y. j,} ^y*iU5Jl ^j^./-'^ ^j^ cj-rr^"^' fS^. '7*-'> 
fol. 57-' Gen. 49, 33: iL^>l^\ Xs>^l.\ ^^ ij^il ^y,, on Friday 
of the sixth week [of the Fast], i. e. Friday of Holy Week. 
From Exodus 3, 3 to Deuteronomy 34, 4 all speeches of God 
to Moses are counted up from 1 to 18G, in blue ink, Copto- 
Arabic figures being placed in the margin (compare MSS. 
A, C, H, 0). 

Genesis closes fol. 58" with a colophon in four lines enclosed 
in an ornamental rectangular frame: 

i*.J^S^ ^^.«.^a-« «^X^lJ"^ <*.JJl ^^-X-J J-0^ 

from which we see that the MS., as stated above, was com- 
pleted in the year 1064 of the era of the Martyrs on the last 
day of the month of Hatur, i. e. November 1347 A. I). Below 
this is written in a single line: i_-JJ...»J\ j^l-aJl o^>^\ x^*L^*J\ JJ^-^, jA^ »_Jb^^xJl iLj!^\ j, ^-til toy. "This 
was written by the weak and sinful Thomas, the wretchad one 
among the priests, the monk and he asks for indulgence". 

Bhode, Arabic Fentateuoli iu the Church of Egypt. 6 

82 The Arabic MSS. of the BocUeian Library at Oxford 

Of thisTMS. H. G. Paulus treats rather extensively in his 
"Commeutatio Critica", Jena 1789. cited above ("Introduction", 
p. 12, n. 1). His quotations are at times inaccurate '. "We agree 
with him, however, in his main contention, that the version 
found in tliis MS. is made from the Septuagint, as against 
the opinion of Vei who says in his Catalogue (Vet. Test. Ar. I, 
p. 29): "Vei-sio plurimis in locis ab editis discrcpans, Hebraeo- 
Samaritauis potius quam Graecis codicibus videtui" consen- 
tanea". This remark shows that Uri cannot have made a 
comparative study of the text. For there is no doubt that we 
liave here the Septuagint text in an Arabic version (compare 
our text edition, Part 11, Sec. II). 

2) Bodl. Libr. Pocock. 219 = K. 

This manuscript which consists of 216 folios is "usu et 
vetustate passim corruptus," as Uei says in his Catalogue (Arab. 
Christ. IV, p. 30). It contains the Pentateuch divided into 
lections; at the end of most of the lections of Genesis and 
Exodus we find short commentaries in the form of homilies. 
The author's name is not given; neither is' the date nor the 
place of origin. 

This codex is of great interest to the student, in as far as 

> We mention two instances (only) in which his interpretation is not 
borne out by the manuscript. Gen. 4, 7 (fol. lO"") Paulus quotes wl^Ljo«.U3 
vM . ^ .^T^ (1. c. p. 61) and says: "Hie notandum est v. 7 pro iuiapTts versi- 
onem ponere: in ambitu tuo peccatum tuum, id quod cum hebraeo magis 
consentit". We must confess our inability to see on what Paulus bases 
this opinion even in the transcription given by himself. In point of fact 
the passage reads thus: (.itX^ka. ki)jLJC:k.Lj, i. e. in thy power (or through 
thy own free choice) is thy sin (compare the variants, below in Part II, 
Sec. II). Again on page 62 he cites Gen. 6, 14: "Alex. m/3<«;o» » fuXuv 
Terpayovai'. Versio: ^yi^)) i ■< >•» •* • ^^ '^t^ (sic!) lw>-«J> navem quadra- 
tarn ex ligno Laisus. ^yi^y quid?'' This ingenious suggestion of 
"Laisus wood" vanishes when we see in the manuscript that ^^-*o_ "^ 
are two words, not one. and that the text really roads (fol. 1-J*'): IXis 
^y^. M)-^""'*. ,^ \My^^ (make thee) a boat of wood that dt>es not 

Part I, Chap. IV 83 

it supplements the version found in the oldest part of MS. 
B. N. Ar. 16. 

The old Copto-Arabic foliation is greatly at variance with 
the modern reckoning; thus folio 66^ is £a (61-') in tlie original 
numbering, 67" is £b (62") etc. These Copto-Arabic figures 
are placed in the left-hand margin of the recto at the top of 
the page; a little lower to the right we find Syriac numeral 
letters; v. g. fol. 66" = i (60), fol. 67" = J (61) etc. The reason 
for this difference in pagination (66" = 61" Copto-Arabic = 
60" Syriac) is not apparent. The quires, ^^X which consist 
of five leaves each, are also counted in Copto-Arabic ciphers, 
and by a later hand in Syriac numeral letters. 

Genesis begins on fol. 7'' with the invocation: <*JJl ^-^ 
(JoU^Xir* »^LXa.M j-r^l ^JJ\ <)JN)l iJ_jj<_o.i ^^^ ^LJ\ ^^ ^J'i^ 

Then follows a rubric, i. e. two lines in red ink: J^Ml ^i.^\ 
cy° J^^ o-rr*^"^^ ?^-rr' i^r-'H'. *-^ ci^"^^ Js'lj-JiJl LJ^xll ^^^ ^i_^ 
il.^ ^XiUJl fy^*- "The First Book. Book of the Creation 
of the World. The first lection from it. Read on the first 
Monday of the Holy Fast in the evening". The book is 
divided into fifty-seven lections. In the fourth we meet three 
lines of explanation or commentary known as j-y^i^ between 
Chap. 1, 26 and 1, 27. After the fourth lection, Gen. 2, 3, 
there follows a j-^^-^iJ' of about a -page, and so generally after 
each lection an explanation is added, introduced by the word 
-.y.^JcJ\ written in red. This "homiletic commentary" usually 
begins with some passage of the text just read; a short moral 
reflection is made on it; then another sentence from the peri- 
cope is cited in direct or indirect quotation, explained or 
developed. Sometimes the commentator passes over to other 

' Here follows a sign which looks exactly like the Copto-Arabic 
cipher for 500 (())). This mark is found repeatedly at the end of the 
lections or the commentary (sec lection 1, 2, 6, 56, 57). Very often this 
sign is used in Christian-Arahic MSS. to denote the end of lengthy para- 
graphs; but we are not able to suggest its special significance. 


84 The Arabic MSS. of the Bodleian Library at Oxford 

sentences of Holy Writ bearing on bis subject, and occasion- 
ally, but only very rarely, he ventures into the tield of literal 
exegesis or textual criticism. 

The commentary is generally written in somewhat smaller 
characters, and each line is preceded and followed by a red 
point in the margin. Here are a few brief specimens of this 
r-y^s^i After the fourth lection, fol. 8'' the coinnientator remarks: 
UUIj L^Jl^ \j!^\ Jli'^ U^^lj ijr^M^ /i-Jl J)^ UiJ ^1 Jlii 
.xXs. Ugj U^jS'.b iS'^Jl iS~»> L«3^ Uiy ^^ Uy<:^ ^V^S Jfy^^ 

^\ U^jJO.^ Lo After the fifty-seventh lection, fol. 67-^, he tells us: 

^ .... 

(sic) Lw^jJ^ f'^'i A-i-4j j^^>J^ *r*^i y^ '^^^ <^ '— *-**'^. i^b 

j^ ^\ .jj ^X> ^) ^\ Jvfr^ ^\ ^^\ dSyt ^Xt^ iJL^ ^-^L»J U^.^ 
l«AJL-oJ ^1 ^J^\y^\ j_yO AJ"j^\ (_y«05l iXSy'l 'j^-<a^ >— *-~'5^. AJI-^l 

"Joseph became ruler of Egypt when he was thirty years 
of age and he remained ruler over it for eighty years. And 
when he was about to die, he was firmly convinced that the 
promise of God would doubtless be fulfilled which he had made 
to the sons of Israel saying": "Behold, I shall lead you out 
of the laud of Egypt". And on account of his trust in this 
promise Joseph ordered his brethren the sons of Israel to 
carry up his bones with them when they themselves would go 
up etc." 

There are but few variants noted on the margin; v. g. 
fol. 66^ (Gen. 50, 2) there is the remark: llLM\ *.«*-•> ^i, 
referring to ^..-JaIs-»-'* in the text; fol. 68-': ^^».^.-_»*^^ ks:^^ ,^, 
speaking of the city of Ramasses, called ^^^^^L*^^ in the text. 
Sometimes rather long omissions, due probably to oversight, 
may be noticed ; v. g. Gen. 3, 28 is entirely lacking. 

Genesis concludes on fol. 67'' with the colophon: Jl^\ J.^ 

\j^j^ \j^\ \^\> ,UJ ^y^\} cr^^y^^^ 4600 stichoi, just as it 
was stated in the colophon of Genesis in MS. B. N. Ar. 16 
(see above, Chap. Ill, 2). 

Part J, Chap. IV 85 

At the commencement of Exodus, fol. 68', we read: <*JJI f-^ 
(J,^')i\ 'i\yJii\ j-^yi-l j-«->«J _j-*5 i\j^\ ^^ (^jjl-^' .i-^\ f-;;s^y O-o-^y^ 
^j-JLJl f_j-«aJl J^l ,^_y^'Ml f^J. It is interesting to note that 
in this manuscrii^t, too, the words JU and ^ introducing a 
speech of God to Moses are always written in red ink. 

- In Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers we notice the same 
liturgical remarks, indication of contents etc. as in MS. B. N. 
Ar. 16 — only that the sectional divisions and other notes taken 
over into MS. Ar. 16 from MS. Ar. 4 are not seen in MS. 
Pocock. 219. In a few instances a remark is found in our 
manuscript that is not given in MS. Ar. 16; thus, v. g., at the 
26 th chapter of Leviticus we are told that at this place begins 
the reading for New Year's day (compare MS. B. N. Paris. 
Ar. 11, in Chap. Ill, 5). 

Genesis, as has been said already, comprises 57 lections, 
Exodus 19, Leviticus 13; Numbers is divided into 23 sections 
(J^>«a9) and Deuteronomy shows no division whatever. 

Paulus in his "Commentatio Critica" (mentioned above) 
p. 39 speaking of the Arabic versions derived from the Syriac 
of the London Polyglot mentions five Bodleian MSS. that con- 
tain the so-called Arabic "Catenae" on the Pentateuch, and 
says: "Quintus denique signo Pocock. 219 dignoscendus. Habet 
et hie suum j-y^-^-sa seu scholia textui intermixta, sed anonymi. 
Hypographeu aut aliud indicium historicum non inveni in Co- 
dice nisi hoc: Ed. Pocockium ex dono Georgii Cornewall 
mercatoris codicem possedisse. Duos posteriores (i. e. Bodl. 
219 et Pocock. 219) apud doct. Urium non invenio recensitos". 
Besides, his words (p. 40): "Tandem cum jam diutius Catenis 
his Carshunicis immoratus fuissem" etc. seem to imply that 
also MS. Pocock. 219 is a Cavshunic MS., like the other four 
MSS. mentioned by him. Evidently the learned author, who 
did not have the advantage of photographic reproductions, 
must have mixed up the notes he had taken in the Oxford 
Library; for MS. Pocock. 219 is clearly no "Carshuuic" MS., 
and it is distinctly mentioned by Uei in his catalogue as 
Arab. Ciirist. IV, p. 3n, col. 1. 

86 The Arabic MSS. of the BoiUeian Library at Oxford 

We may also note in this connection, that E. PrsET in 
his "Catalogi Bodl. Part. II, vol. I" p. 444 speaking of the 
Carshunic codex Bodl, 324, makes a similar mistake when he 
says: "foliis 256 constans duplici columna luculenter descriptus"'. 
This manuscript which we also had photographed for our 
present study shows no sign of a "douhle column", the lines 
running over the entire page. It contains a lengthy "catena" 
of different Fathers and writers on the lections of the Penta- 
teuch. (Gen. has 65 sections.) But when Pusey says: "Cum 
textu biblico hujus Catenae proxime consentit is, qui commen- 
tariis Ephremi illustratur in Bodl. 154 (Uei, Syr. XXVUI), 
Hunt. 112 (Uki, Syr. XXX), Marsh. 440 (Uri, Syr. XXVI), 
Pocock. 219 (Uei, Arab. Christ. IV)"— he certainly does not 
quite hit the mark. As to the close similarity of the Biblical 
text in these MSS., we do not wish to deny that there is 
some resemblance between the texts of Pocock. 219 and Bodl. 
;524, although there are a very large number of important 
variant readings; neither are we in position to say anything 
about the contents of Bodl. 154 and Hunt. 112; but we can- 
not admit that Pocock. 219 should contain the commentary 
of St. Ephrem. This is found in Marsh. 440 of which we 
shall speak in the next paragraph; but the j-^^^-^^ in Pocock. 
219 differs greatly from the former; in fact, it does not amount 
to one-fifth of the commentary given in the Carshunic MS. 
Marsh. 440. 

Moreover Pusey is certainly mistaken when he proceeds 
(1. c.) : "Longius recedunt, sed eandem hand dubie versionem 
continent Hunt. 1 86 (Uri, Arab. Christ. IX), Hunt. 424 (Uri, 
Arab. Christ. VIII), Sekl. 66 (Uei, Arab. Christ. VII)". We 
cannot say anything about Hunt. 186 and Seld. 66; but that 
Hunt. 424 contains a version altogether different from the one 
found in Pocock. 219 (and even in Bodl. 324), may be seen 
by any one who compares the specimen chapters of the two 
versions in Part II of our work, Sec. I and Sec. IV respectively. 

As to the statement of Paulus (1. c. p. 36) that the Arabic 
text of the group under which he classes Pocock. 219 is a 

Part I, Chap. IV 87 

translation of the Syriac version found in the Polyglot, we 
may remark that possibly this is true of the other four MSS. 
(see above) mentioned by him in this connection. But if they 
contain the same text as Pocock. 219, the assertion must be 
modified considerably. For the Syriac text found in the London 
Polyglot is the same, substantially, as that of the Eastern 
Syriac (Urmia edition) and Western Syriac (Lee's edition) 
Bible, i. e. the Peshitto pure and simple, translated from the 
Hebrew, though corrected at a later period according to the 
Septuagint'. This correction and revision, however, docs not 
go far as regards the Pentateuch. But between the text of 
the Peshitto and that found in MS. Pocock. 219 there are 
almost a dozen more or less important differences in the very 
first chapter of Genesis alone. 

3) Bodl. Libr. Marsh. 440 = N. 

This splendid MS. in folio has just been mentioned in 
speaking of MS. Pocock. 219. It is a Carshunic MS. of 370 
pages containing Genesis and Exodus with an extensive and 
highly interesting commentary. • The manuscript is of rather 
recent date, 1799 of the Greeks, 1487 A. D., and was written 
in the renowned monastery of Kannubin in Syria. It is 
divided into two volumes of almost equal size, so that Genesis 
ending on fol. 214'' runs partly into the second volume. 

We have taken account of this MS., because it represents 
substantially the same Arabic text as MvSS. Pocock. 219, B. 
N. Ar. 16 etc., as may be seen from our collation of texts 
(Part II, Sec I). Moreover, in Genesis the number of lections 
and the liturgical indications agree almost entirely with those 
marked on the other MSS. of this group 2. The spelling of 
the proper names is decidedly Syriac. European numerals in 

' DovAt,, R., La Litterature Syriaque, 3. edit., Paris 195)7, p. 33 sqri. 

2 Exodus, according to Uri, is divided into 30 lections for the feasts 
of Oui- Lord, the Blessed Virgin and the Apostles. We have not been 
able to verify this statement, which would point to an important dift'erence 
between this 1\LS. and Ar. 16 etc. (E.'c. 19 lections). 

88 The A rahic MSS. of the Bodleian Library at Oxford 

the upper left corner count the pages. The quires are numbered 
in Syriac letters (at the bottom of the page) at the beginning 
and end of each quinion. 

Fol. 3* Genesis begins with the invocation of tlie Trinity: 

l^o v^oa& vaxo ^ cK^oJII «li-a^^ nlioK.^ ^l-firol ">'«•■ ^ '^ojll ,«"»» 

>^i<;^ ^po yiLaja^ >>Ojiiiv Vol ^ opla^ v«j1.J)I yo-. After this ex- 
clamation in Syriac: "Lord, have mercy on me", there follow 
the first two verses of Genesis, and then v*mBt:Sk. Fol. A^' 
2d col., the text is taken up again with the word oIKai^.. Two 
verses only from Sciipture are quoted, followed by a long 
„tafsir'', and in this way text and commentary alternate 
throughout the manuscript. 

Fol. 2^' seems to have afforded different readers an occasion 
to indulge their fancy. On top we read: IIoi'Tax)^ ri]v dXriOuav. 
Then follow some illegible Hues in Syriac characters. The 
upper and lower outer corners were utilized for Arabic notes 
and phrases; five or six lines of Syriac are enclosed in an 
irregular quadrangular frame, aside of which four small circles 
are painted; below to the rigiit there is a long Arabic note 
of twelve half-lines, and to the left another reader has trans- 
literated into Arabic characters the introduction of the Can- 
shunic text on the next page ( J\ \^J^\ (b-»«o) quoted above. 

Marginal notes are rare. There is a Syriac philosophical 
remark on fol. 35^ an indication of contents in Syriac on 
fol. 36", and an Arabic note on fol. 43'' stating: ^\ JUb,^ 
*-^ <_s* f^' ("0 verb) U,-^ ,^\ 'ijS.-^^\ "It is said that the 
tree from which Adam [ate] was a fig-tree". 

The Carshunic colophon to Genesis, fol. 214^ furnishes us 
this interesting information: "Know, Father, that the Book 
of Exodus was (written) before the Book of Genesis; but 
Moses commanded Joshua, the son of Xun, to write it (Genesis) 
before the Book of Exodus, for the reason tliat the account 
(given in Genesis) was one that jjreceded (that given in Exodus). 
And thus Moses put the Book of Genesis first; but Moses 

Part I, Chap. IV 89 

learned (by revelation) the Book of Genesis only after the 
Book of Exodus. And the power is with God''. 

There follows in three lines a prayer in Syriac, which we 
may aptly quote here: 

.^«jel ^ v i NsN ^^Av I<:»VS.t aio^^i .sioKftl, ,^»i.^a .J.b.aM,«Xe 

"With the eternal possessions gladden, God, Thy servant 
Joseph who wrote and arranged (this book) according to his 
ability, and the owner and the reader and the hearer and 
everyone who takes part (in the book). The mercy of God 
be upon us forever. Amen". 

4) Bod). Libr. Hunt. 424 = X. 

Of this quarto MS. (408 pages) of the Arabic Pentateuch 
we have had occasion to say a few words when treating of 
MS. Pocock. 219 (2d paragraph of this chapter). Paulus in 
his "Commentatio Critica" speaks of it in two places: when 
dealing with the Arabic versions derived from the Syriac 
(page 46 and page .50, where he gives a specimen of Gen. 49, 
3 — 27, also p. .55), and again when treating of those that 
represent the Septuagint text (p. 58 and p. 62 — specimen of 
Gen. 1, 1—5) '. 

This is owing to the fact that the first and last part of 
this manuscript (Gen. 1,1—5, 10 and Deut. 32,43—34, 12) 
present a version made from the Septuagint, whereas the bulk 
of the volume follows, though rather loosely, the Hebrew text. 

Uki guided by tlie title: ^\^^m}\ ^^ i.».i>.-X« 'i\j^i\ ^_ilXS 
^i^l ^J,\ states that the MS. represents a version made 
from the Hebrew. Yet he notices the fact that the first ten 
and the last six pages are of parchment, whilst the rest of 
the volume is papei-. As far as we can see from our roto- 

' To the words j~k^3R-0a j^ of his text Paulus remarks in a foot- 
note: Jasx-l^? sine pulcritudine, an vero ^^i^X* . — Here both the text 
given by Paulus and the emendation proposed by him are out af place, 
for the MS. distinctly writes: A-vJuOo j-^j <)Lt^O-<i _-^. 

90 The Arabic MSS. of the Boilleian Library at Oxford 

graphs, the old part of the manuscript begins on fol. 15 with 
Gen. 5,11. AVhether the first page of the manuscript as now 
extant is numbered fol. 5, or whether, instead of ten, Uia should 
have said fourteen pages are parchment, we cannot decide at 
present The fact is that Genesis begins on fol. 7" with the 
introduction: <)o. ^j^^,-wJl ,J\M1 ^jJ^"^' j^i^\yi <UJl (.--o 

.LJ>xJ\ ^^ ,i_w »*^ AJL-Jji-I ^k^ J'"^' ,i-.^l ^li-»;l il^—^ 

We need not give specimens of the text here, because 
eight chapters (1 — 6, 18 and 50) are found complete in the 
second part of our work. Sec. IV. We have there tried to 
make the text readable; the oftentimes unintelligible "readings" 
of the MS. we have put in the notes below the text. 

There is no trace of old foliation, nor are the quires 
numbered. Genesis ends (fol. IDS") with the colophon: J^^ 

.(.sic) «Xv^l i-J^ 
And below we read: ,^\S i_i— jy. ^\ ^^J!LLJ\ ,_^»jl> ^i^ 

^ISj <*v.^-lj ....a.* u^ ^ ijjfc \j d<X,ui ».*a.« C^r"^ J-*^ ^^ ^ '^~^^. 

"Some of the commentators state, that the coffin of Joseph 
used to be taken by turns one year to the Eastern the next 
to the Western people of Egypt, and there was abundance 
and blessing wherever it was". 

This note may perhaps lend color to the opinion that ours 
is an Egyptian manuscript; but we do not wish to urge this 
point much. In fact we know nothing of the origin ("pro- 
venance") of the MS. We feel justified, however, in giving 
extracts from this version in our dissertation, because the first 
and last part of the MS. represent the Septuagint recension 
though differing considerably in style from the other (Septu- 
agint) texts mentioned by us, even if one does not care to 
indorse the opinion of Padlu.s (1. c. p. 63): "Indolem spirat 
hoc specimen (hujus scil. versionis) non vulgarem." Besides, 
as we remarked before (Chap, IV, 2), Pusey holds that our 

Parti, Chap. IV 91 

version greatly resembles the text of Pocock. 219 (and its 
group), edited by us in Part II, Sec. I. And as we have 
claimed that this opinion is untenable, whether we refer it to 
the old or to the new part of the manuscript, it is proper 
that we give the corresponding chapters of this version also, 
so that the reader may judge for himself as to the incorrect- 
ness of the statement. 

The more recent part of the MS. ends on fol. \^^ with 
the indication of the first two words of the following page 
*.J jJ^j below which the scribe put the significant rubric ^, 
"it is correct". We notice in this first part at Gen. 1,14 
(fol. 7'0 and Gen. 1,23 (fol. 8'') the words Aill Li,^ written in 
red ink. The words are redundant, for in both cases there 
follows the ordinary expression: ^JUl Jli"^. There is likewise 
a whole superfluous phrase on fol. IT' (Gen. 3, 8) written in 
red: ^jijj ^^>ja\\ J, (sic) JU dOJl Cj^,^ L«.,^.«j P', for im- 
mediately after the ordinary text begins. Several other words 
or parts of sentences are also written in red (Gen. 2,8; 2,23; 
3,23; 4,25), but in these cases the words belong to the text. 
When the scribe reached the end of the fourth chapter, 
fol. 13'', he noticed that he would have about one page too 
much space; so he wrote the remaining first ten verses of the 
fifth chapter in distended letters and in lines wide apart (eight 
on a page), so that the text might cover the next two pages 
of the MS. 

If in the first part of the MS. the writing is very plain 
and distinct; in the second it is very often almost illegible. 
The scribe was certainly most careless with regard to pointing 
and also with regard to the consonantal text itself. Omissions 
and repetitions of letters and words, sometimes even entire 
sections put iu the wrong place (v. g. fol. 31'' between Gen. 17, 21 
and 17, 22 there are about five lines of text belonging to chapter 
18,12 — 15, where, however, they are again properly placed) 
are nothing extraordinary in this portion of our MS. 

As the chronology of the Patriarchs in Chap. V (besides 
other distinguishing traits) shows, the new part represents the 

92 The Arabic MSS. of the Bodleian Library at Oxford 

Septuagint version. The first page (fol. 15") of the old part, 
on the contrary, reveals the fact, borne out by further com- 
parison, that we have to do with a translation made from the 
Hebrew. For from verse 11 the chronology agrees with the. 
Hebrew, save that in the case of Henoch and Methusala their 
years are wrongly set down as ;t65 and 960 respectively, 
whereas the sum of the years assigned to them before and 
after the birth of their first-born is 905 and 969 respectively 
(the ordinary Hebrew computation). 

The new part has no sections or headlines whatever; the 
old part at times shows an indication of contents written in 
large characters, v. g. ^'J^l i-^ (Gen. G, 14), f^^-^ *-^" 
(Gen. 18, 16), U^^, i^LJ (Gen. 50, 24). 

Of this version we may say with PAULrs (1. c. p. 55) that 
it frequently inserts glosses, gives fitting explanations and cir- 
cumlocutions, and does not follow the Syriac version literally. 
To which we may add, that it is certainly not a literal trans- 
lation of the Hebrew either, but very often a loose paraphrase 
only, lengthening or shortening even the narration, so long as 
the main facts are preserved. At times rather odd "exegetical" 
interpretations are freely interwoven with the inspired text. 
In this way we explain, for instance, the remarkable story 
introducing the account of the flood (Gen. 6, 1 — 4; for the 
text see Part II, Sec. IV), how the sons of Seth living on the 
summit of the mountain saw the daughters of Kabil (sic), 
which is (?) the lowest part of Mt. Anhar (?), went in unto 
them and thus begot the race of giants, "the mighty men of 
old, men of renown". 

As an historical curiosity we transcribe here the end of 
the introduction of this MS. After speaking of the excellency 
of the Law promulgated by Moses and delivered to the Jewish 
people, handed down from generation to generation through 
the prophets, doctors and high-priests, (the "chain" of tradition 
is linked very carefully, the name of the judge, high-priest or 
doctor who was the chosen custodian of the Law is given and 
likewise the name of him to whom the former, before his 

Part 1, Chap. IV 93 

demise, intrusted the Holy Books— 66 persons, we think, fi-om 
Moses to Caiphas), the writer speaks of the siege and capture 
of Jerusalem under Titus (70 A. D.), of the atrocities com- 
mitted by the conquerors, who led large numbers of the people 
captive from Jerusalem, the Holy City, unto Rome'. Then 
he continues (fol. 6^): "It is related of him (Titus) that he 
fed the lions and the wild beasts with them, whilst those who 
were with him gazed with pleasure upon them, and that he 
used them as bait for the wild animals— 80000 men out of 
the total number of the captives. 

Now Solomon, the son of David, had built a city difficult 
of access as an arsenal for his possessions (a treasury) whose 
name was Batir, which, it is said, is now called Balbek. 
Titus could not take this (city). The priests, therefore, con- 
veyed the (books of the) Law thereto and entrusted the same 
to Samayah and Abtalyah, the magistrates of the city of 

But then after a long time Hadrian the King (Emperor 
Hadrian, 117—138 A. D.) besieged Batir and forced it to 
open its gates to. him. Then the chiefs of the descendants of 
David took the Law and went to Bagdad, and they are living 
in Bagdad unto this day. 

And when the Jews were dispersed into the lands, the sons 
of David made copies of it (the Law), and sent them to every 
band (of the Jews). 

But the High-priests Annas and Caiphas had agreed, be- 
fore the captivity of Titus, to subtract 1000 years from the 
history of the lives of the Patriarchs, in order to deny the 
apparition of the Messias, and they told the Jews that the 
time in which the Messias woidd appear was not yet complete. 
And they (the Jews) remain in their error even to this our 

' For the Arabic text see Appendix II. 


1) Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 = S. 

This ^rS. of 268 folio pages which contains the entire 
Pentateuch in Arabic, is assigned by Assemani to the 14th 
century (Script. Vet. IV, part. 2, p. 2). It was once cod. XI 
orient, of the collection of the celebrated Peter a Valle, as 
is still shown on fol. 2'' (original Copto-Arabic foliation), the 
page preceding the text. This begins fol. 1" of the modern 
numeration (Copto-Arabic 3") abruptly with the heading 
J^'ill ,J-.aiJ\. There are fifteen lines on the page, the hand- 
writing is large and on the whole very distinct. Marginal 
notes arc rare indeed. Fol. 23 ' (Gen. 18, 28j there is added 
on the margin j^wcjo^\5 to the i*.^»i\ of the text ('"wilt Thou 
destroy the whole city for the sake of forty-five?", instead ot 
"five" as the Hebrew text says). As a rule these words on 
the margin are nothing else than a supplying of a word or 
phrase omitted in the text. Fol. 9" (Copto-Arabic 11°) we 
notice indication of the quire: ^Lill ^\^\. 

We had this codex photographed being prompted by the 
notice of Assemani (1. c): "Pentateuchus ]Mosis, versionis 
aegyptiacae seu alexandrinae, quae ex graeca twv LXX inter- 
pretttm editione concinnata est." But "dormitat alii]uando et 
bonus Homerus". The version of MS. Vatic. Ar. 2 is in no 
wise made from the Greek, but literally from I he Hebrew. 
All the distinguishing features — omissions, additions, differences 
in names and in the years of the Patriarchs etc. — clearly show 

Fart 1, Chap. V 95 

that this is a Hebrew- Arabic version. ' In fact it is one of the 
most literal Araljic versions from the Hebrew we know of. 

It agrees verbatim with the text in P. Kahle's „Die 
Arabischen Bibeltibersetzungen" (Leipzig 1904) V, p. 13 — 23, 
edited from Florent. Cod. Palat. orient. 112 (XXI), where it 
is called in the superscription "Saadias' version" (see Kahle, 
1. c. p. VIII note 2). In Part II Sect. Ill of this dissertation 
eight chapters of Genesis from the Vatican MS will be found. 
For the first four chapters edited by Kahle we give the 
variants, slight ones indeed, of the Florentine MS. (according 
to Kahle's printed text) below our text. We have designated 
these variants by "V". In the notes attention is called to a 
few omissions, vulgar forms and other peculiarities of the text. 

Since the Paris (and London) Polyglot text of the Arabic 
Pentateuch is taken from MS. B. N. Ar. 1, and is generally 
admitted to be Saadias' translation, we give in Chap. L of 
Genesis (Part II, Sect. Ill) the variants of the London Poly- 
glot from our Vatic. MS. These variants of "Walton's 
Polyglot" are designated in the notes below the text by the 
abbreviation "W". The writer regrets to say that he did not 
have the text of MS. B. N. Ar. 1 itself at his disposal for the 
collation of the "Saadias' version" i. 

We have taken MS. Vatic. Ar. 2 into account in our Study 
and have even edited some chapters of it, partly because the 
misleading error of Assemani had to be corrected, but yet 
more because this version was, it seems to us, used by the 
Christian Church of Egypt, not indeed as the officially recog- 
nized text — for this was a version from the Septuagint— but 
for comparison, corrections, divisions etc. 

> Compare in this conuection our remarks on the version found in 
JVI8. B. N. Ar. 4, Chap. Ill, 2; see also "Introduction", page 12, note 1. 
J. Dbrenbourq, Version Arabe du Pentateuque de Saadia ben Josef Al- 
Fayyumi, Paris 1893, published "Saadias"' Arabic translation in Hebrew 
characters from a Yemen MS. and the Constantinople and London Poly- 
glots, taking no account of the Florentine MS. (and Leyden Cod. i}77 
Warner, published by de Lauabde, Materialien I), much less of MS. Vatic. 
Ar. 2. 

96 The remaining Manuscripts and the printed Editions etc. 

Thus there are a large number of variants, especially in 
MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 and its group, and also in MS. B. N. Ar. 16 
and its likes, marked as "Arabic" (^J^/■ or simply ^), or even 
without such a title, which poiiit to our translation. For it 
is not in sense only but often in the very word that these 
variants agree with the Hebrew-Arabic version found in MS. 
Vatic. Ar. 2. 

Again, there can be no doubt (we hinted at this in Chap. 11,1 : 
MS. A) that the sections or chapters (J^-aj) marked in MS. 
Vatic. Copt. 1 (frtim whence they passed into MS. B. N. Ai-. 12) 
are taken from tliis Hebrew-Arabic text. Thus in our MS. 
Genesis has 47 sections, which agree to the word with the 
division marks in the margin of MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 (compare 
oui- remark on the eighth section, Chap. II, 1). Exodus like- 
wise has 26 sections, Leviticus 16-, Numbers 35 and Deuter- 
onomy 18.- 

We are inclined to believe that in this division of the 
Pentateuch into 142 sections we have before us a division 
similar in character and purpose to that of the Sedarim or 
triennial pericopes of the Hebrew Bible. For, if in Hebrew 
MSS. of the Pentateuch these sections vary in number from 
154 to 167, according to the exhaustive study of GiNSBrEG 
(Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, London 1897, p. 32 sqq.), 
we may, perhaps, also reasonably suppose that the Jews of 
Egj'pt, who were forced to accommodate themselves in regard 
to feast days and religious observances in general to the 

2 AssEUANi gives 15 sections for Leviticus; but we think there is a 
mistake ou his part For, when giving the complete number of sections 
from the colophon, he assigns the number 132. But if we add the number 
of sections of the single books, we find 141. We may, therefore, well 
suppose an error on the part of the scribe or the reader, since it should 
either have been written or read 142 (not 132). And this difference of 
one between the actual number of sections and that assigned (most 
probably) in the colophon, allows us to add one section to Leviticus, 
making the total number of sections in this book 16 instead of 15. We 
are confirmed in this opinion on finding 16 sect, in Levit. in MSS. Vat. 
Copt. 1 and B. N. Ar. 12. 

Part I, Chap. Y 97 

Mohammedan masters of the country, as we know from 
Makrizi's History and other sources, may have found it ne- 
cessary to reduce the number of sections by twelve, making 
four lections less for each year, so as to be able to read 
tlie whole Pentateuch within three years. This opinion derives 
additional probability from the fact that in our MS. Vatic. 
Ar. 2 fol. 8 (Copto- Arabic 10) we find this title at Genesis 6,9: 
^..JLiJl iJil^iJI Jjl _j«,^ cj^'-^' J-«^l, "the eighth Section, 
which is the beginning of the second Parashah". 

2) Printed editions cosulted and collated. 

A. In Sect. II of the second part of our Study we have 
collated for the first, eighteenth and fiftieth chapter of Genesis 
the Arabic text as it appears in the Euchologium of the Coptic 
Church, published by Raphael Tuki in three books, Rome, Pro- 
paganda, 1736 and 1761 — 62. These three books are generally 
referred to as the "Missale Copto-Arabice" — "Pontificale Copto- 
Arabice" (2 vols.) — "Rituale Copto-Arabice" i. 

GuiDi cited by Hoener (Consecration of Church and Altar, 
p. V— see below, B) is authority for the statement that Tuki's 
MS. is lost. It is impossible, therfore, to say from which 
ancient sources this Coptic bishop drew for his publication. 
Certain it is, that the Arabic text found in his bilingual litur- 
gical books belongs to the group represented by MS. Vatic. 
Copt. 1, MS. B. N. Ar. 12 etc. The version is, in our opinion, 
made directly from the Coptic, but Tuki has endeavored in 
numerous places to revise his Copto-Arabic text upon the 
Greek of the Septuagint. — Tuki's variants we designate by "T". 

As the Copto-Arabic Missal, Pontifical and Ritual are not 
furnished with comprehensive indexes, it may facilitate inquiry 
if we here give a complete list of all the parts of the Penta- 
teuch that occur in the Euchologium 2. 

1 See H. Hyvernat, Egypt-Coptic Church, in the Catholic Encyclo- 
pedia, vol. V, p. 361. 

2 In the Missal we have found only four Scriptural passages, viz. 
Mt. 26, 26— 29 (p. THA), I Cor. 11, 23— 27 (p. TUI'), Psalm 22, 6 (p. TllAi, 
Psalm 116, 1. 2 (p. IV in the Anaphora). 

Rhodb, Araljic Feutateucli in the Churcb uf Egypt. 7 

98 The remaining Manuscripts and the printed Editions etc. 

Gen. 1. 1—2, 3 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 505. 
„ 18, 1—23 "Lakane" (Mandatum) 

Pontif. vol. II p. 280. 
23, 1—24, 1 Woman dying in Holy Week 

Ritual p. 541. 
., 25, 7 — 11 Mourning over a Bishop 

Ritual p. 313. 
„ 28, 10—22 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 512. 
„ 28, 10—22 Over the Baptismal Font 

Pontif. vol. II p. 200. 
„ 50, 4 — 25 Man dying in Holy Week 

Ritual p. 534. 
Exod. 14' "Lakane" (Mandatum) 

Pontif. vol. II p. 286. 
„ l.i, 17—30 "Lakane" on the Feast of St. Peter 

and St. Paul Pontif. vol. II p. 417. 
25, 1 — 26, 30 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 515. 
„ 30, 22 — 33 Consecration of "Myron" on Holy 

Thursday Pontif. vol. I p. 289. 

„ 30, 17 — 31, 11 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 526. 
„ 39, 43—40, 33" Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 530. 
„ 40, 33''— 38 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. 1 p. 536. 
Num. 4, 1 — 16 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 536. 
„ 4, 17—32 Consecration of Church 

Pontif. vol. I p. 541. 
„ 20, 22''— 29 Priest dying in Holy Week 

Ritual p. 525. 

' This does uot seem to be a iSoriptiual text. 

I'ari I, Chap. V. 99 

Deut. 5, 22—6, 3 Feast of the Adoration of the Holy 

Cross Pontif. vol. II p. 332. 

16, 1—18 Feast of the Adoration of the Holy 

Cross Pontif vol. II p. 375. 

„ 31, 14 — 16" Mourning over a Bishop 

Ritual p. ;]17. 
„ 32, 39 — 4i Mourning over a Bishop 

Ritual p. 311. 
„ 32, 48—52 Mourning over a Bishop 

Ritual p. 310. 
B. The Rev. G. Hoener edited in 1902 (London) the „Ser- 
vice for the Consecration of a Church and Altar according to 
the Coptic Rite". The text is published from an old MS. 
(1024 A. M. = 1307 A. D.) presented by the Coptic Patriarch 
Kyrillos of Cairo to the Bishop of Salisbury in 1898 (see his 
Introduction, pp. V — X). 

In tliis Service occur a large number of readings from Holy 
Scripture, both of the Old and the New Testament. Apart 
from single verses interspersed here and there in the ritual 
text, there are consecutive lections from the Pentateuch as 
follows : 

Gen. 1, 1—2, 3 p. 81-92 

„ 28, 10—22 p. 92—97 

Exod. 25, 1—26, 30 p. 97—119 

„ 30, 17—31, 11 p. 119-128 
„ 39, 43—40, 33 p. 128—135 
„ 40, 33 -.38 p. 136-137 

Num. 4, 1—16 p. 137—145 

„ 4, 17—32 p. 145—150 

We have collated this text in Sec. II of the second Part 
of our Study for the first lection from Genesis (1, 1 — 2, 3). 
The variants are indicated by the letter "R". 




Having described the single manuscripts which form the 
subject of our Study and pointed out the peculiarities of each 
one of them, we may now classify them according to the nature 
of the version .they represent. 

MS. Bodl. Libr. 324 aud MS. B. X. Ar. 4 may be passed 
over here without impropriety. We have dealt with them 
sufficiently in Chap. IV, 2 aud Chap. Ill, 2 respectively. The 
peculiar text of the former entered into our discussion merely 
incidentally, whilst the version found in the latter is certainly 
not a "version of the Pentateuch (made or used officially) in 
the Church of Egypt". Of MS. B. X. Ar. 4. however, we shall 
catalogue the sections of the text, because these have been 
copied into MS. B. X. Ar. 16 (see next chapter). 

MS. Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 (S) contains an Arabic version from 
the Hebrew, as was said above (Cliap. V, 1). For reasons 
there stated we have deemed it advisable to edit a number of 
chapters from this MS. in Sect. Ill of Part II of our work. 

Of MS. Bod). Libr. Hunt. 424 (X), the old and new portions 
of which represent two ditierent versions, we also publish a 
number of chapters (Part II, Sect. IV) for the reasons set 
forth in treating of this MS. (Chap. IV. 4) and of MS. Bodl. 
Libr. Pocock. 219 (Chap. IV, 2). 

The other fourteen manuscripts, with which we are chiefly 
concerned, may be conveniently divided into two main groups. 

The first group comprises seven manuscripts, viz.: 
MS. B. X. Paris. Ar. 16 = H 
MS. Bodl. Libr. Pocock. 219 = K 

Part I, Chap VI 101 

MS. B. N. Paris. Ar. 9 = L 

MS. B. N. Paris. Ar. 10 = M 

MS. Bodl. Libr. Marsh. 440 = N 

MS. B. N. Paris. Ar. II = O 

MS. B. N. Paris. Ar. 18 = P 
The second group consists liiiewise of seven manuscripts, viz.: 

MS. Vatic. Libr. Copt. 1 = A 

MS. Vatic. Libr. Copt. 2 = B 

MS. B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 = C 

MS. Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 33 = D 

MS. Bodl. Libr. Laud. or. 272 = E 

MS. B. N. Paris. Ar. 12 = F 

MS. British Museum or. 422 = G 
As already stated, tliis classification is based simply on the 
nature of the version found on the several manuscripts. We 
refer the reader to our text edition, Part II, Sect. 1 and Sect. II, 
respectively, where the identity of the version contained in the 
different manuscripts of each group becomes quite apparent. 
We have there tried to establish a normal te.Kt of both 
groups for eight chapters of Genesis, viz. Chaps. I— VI, XVIII 
and L, by collating the seven manuscripts, correcting evident 
mistakes in one on the authority of the others and thus restor- 
ing as far as possible the original text of the two versions. 
The variants we designate by the abbreviation chosen (see above, 
Chap. II) for the manuscript in which they are found. An 
Arabic exponent to the right "of the capital letter denotes a 
variant not found in the main text of the manusci'ipt but 
between the lines and on the margin. 

As to the relation which exists between the single manu- 
scripts of each group, we have already said something when 
describing the manuscripts. It is difficult however, to say 
anything definite about the mutual relation of the manuscripts 
of the first group. Possibly MS. B. N. Ar. 10 in its original 
state may have been the copy from which MS. Pocock. 219 
was transcribed. For not only is the text and the "tafsir" 
of the two MSS. identical, but they also agree perfectly as to 

102 Grouping of the Manuscripts 

the indication of the lections, the marginal notes and liturgical 
remarks. MS. B. X. Ar. 9 was, perhaps, copied from MS. B. N. 
Ar. 16 before the commentary had been added on the margin 
of the latter. But it seems more probable that MSS. B. .N. 
Ar. 9 and Ar. 16 are two distinct copies made directly from 
the same original text. Something similar is most likely to 
be said of the origin of MSS. B.N. Ar. 10 and Ar. 11. MS- 
:\larsh. 440 and MS. B. N. Ar. 18 may both have drawn from 
an ancient manuscript containing the same text as MS. B. N. 
Ar. 16 but enriched with the commentary of St. Ephrem, 

In the second group a careful examinatian of the texts 
and variants leads us the recognize three distinct classes of 
MSS., viz.: 

1) Vatic. Libr. Copt. 1 (A) 
B. N. Paris. Ar. 12 (F) 
Bodl. Libr. Laud. or. 272 (E) 

2) Vatic. Libr. Copt. 2 ^B) 

3) B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 (C) 
British Museum or. 422 (G) 
Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 3:5 (D) 

1) When treating of MS. B. N. Ar. 12 (F) we made the 
assertion that this MS. was simply a copy of the Arabic text 
of MS. Vatic. Copt. 1 (A). In support of this claim we may 
refer in general to our text edition, where it is shown that 
the two MSS. agree perfectly, not only as to the text proper, 
but also almost invariably as to marginal and interlinear 

Moreover, in MS. F the proper names of towns, rivers, coun- 
tries, persons (especially in Chaps. V and X of Genesis) are 
almost always written in Coptic letters above the Arabic names. 
The spelling of these Coptic words is identical with that used 
in the Coptic text of MS. A. In the latter MS. we sometimes 
find in such cases the Arabic equivalent on the margin or 
between the lines introduced by the letter JJ (Coptic), v. g. 

Gen. 2, 11 ^^^ iib^l- ^^S' -^ drops these variants, and instead 

Part I, Chap. VI 103 

writes the Coptic equivalent iu Coptic characters over the 
corresponding Arabic word. 

Again, the notes, liturgical and critical, of MS. F are almost 
literally the same as those of MS. A. It happens very rarely 
that MS. F adds any remark of its own, and still more rarely 
does MS. F omit anything that is found in the margins of 
MS. A. Furthermore, MS. F at times puts the readings, or 
rather corrections, which MS. A has in the margin with the 
significant note ^-^ ("correct"), directly into the text; so too it 
not unfrequently inserts into the text itself those omissions 
which A had supplied in the margin; v. g. Gen. 2, 9, "the 
tree of the knowledge of good and evil", MS. A writes in the 
margin i.^^.^' isjjix), which words MS. F simply adopts in the 
text. Compare also Gen. 1, 22: (^a^Jc;^. Ou the other hand 
it happens that MS. F omits a word or two which are found 
in MS. A; v. g. Gen. 1, 25, MS. F lacks the words: ^'M^.i 

Another strong argument for our contention may be drawn 
from the fact noted above (Chap. II, 1 and Chap. Ill, note 1), 
that in MS. A the long passage Num. 28, 23—29, 5 is lacking 
both in the Coptic and in the Arabic, witliout any notice of 
the omission either in the text or iu the margin ; whereas in 
MS. F the same mutilated text had at first been faithfully 
transcribed without any misgiving, the deficiency being supplied 
later on tlie margin "according to the Greek and the Hebrew" 

or J.^M1 ^J.s. 

Not to speak of the identity of introductory and concluding 
phrases of the l)ooks of the Pentateuch in these two MSS., we 
shall adduce but one more proof to show that MS. F must 
have been copied from MS. A. It was remarked above 
(Chap. II, 1) that the headlines indicating the sections, J-^aiJl 
J^Ml etc. (47 iu Gen. etc.), were crowded between the lines 
in MS. A after the text had already been written. MS. F, 
however, brings these section-marks written in bold characters 
in a separate line, and, to leave no doubt as to the correclness 

104 Grouping of the Manuscripts 

of our conjecture, section 8, wrongly placed at Gen. 6. 8 in 
the Arabic text of MS. A instead of Gen. 9, is indicated in 
MS. F at Gen. 6, 8 also. Section 32 (Gen. 26, 1) and section 36 
(Gen. 32, 1) which are not marked in MS A are likewise not 
to be found in MS. F, where on account of the prominence 
of the headlines an omission in the consecutive order of sections 
could in itself have been detected very easily. 

The text of MS. Laud. or. 272 (E) seems to us to represent 
the very same recension as MSS. A and F; most likely the 
version was copied from MS. A, or from the original whence 
the Arabic translation in the margin of MS. A was taken. 

2) The version found on MS. Vatic. Copt. 2 (B), though 
substantially the same as that of MSS. A and F, appears to 
be a different recension, the scribe (or the translator?) having 
endeavored to correct the Arabic text at times according to 
the Greek, at times according to the Coptic. A definite con- 
clusion as to the exact nature of the Arabic text of MS. B 
can only be reached after a thorough investigation of the origin 
of the variants found in this MS. 

3) MSS. B. N. Paris. Copt. 1 (C), British Museum or. 422 
(G) and Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 33 (D) are alike with regard to 
the Coptic as well as the Arabic text. MS. D may have been 
copied directly from MS. C or its prototype, as was said above 
(Chap. II, -i). But it is more likely that MS. G (copied in 
all probability from MS. C or its prototype) is the original 
from which the Huntington MS. (D) was transcribed. A few 
examples from the text of the two MSS. may serve to corro- 
borate this opinion. In Chap. L of Genesis the word "he wept" 
is spelled in two different ways in both MSS.. ISj in verse 1, 
and ^^ in verse 3. In verse 4 of the same chapter MS. D 
writes Cj^^^^ >^" instead of CjJ^j j\. This mistake is readily 
explained by an "error of the eye", because in MS. G the 
next verse begins with the syllable ^, in ^^\3S. Mistakes 
in the text, faulty spellings, omissions and the like are identic- 
al in MSS. G and D. Thus in Gen. 50. 18 both write ^lU^^ 
instead of ^_5^-j; and in Gen. 50, 4 c: — iJo L^ is omitted by 

Part I, Chap. VI 105 

each. At this place MS. G refers by a cross ( + ) to the 
margin where a correction or addition must have been placed; 
but of this the last letters only O and perhaps (?) J=> are still 
distinguishable. MS. D, however, omits this correction entirely, 
because perhaps the writer never puts any variants or emen- 
dations in his manuscript, also perhaps because the copyist, 
writing in 1674 (see above, Chap. II, 4), could not decipher 
the marginal note in MS. G any better than we can now. 

Nevertheless, it is somewhat remarkable that in a few in- 
stances MS. D corrects a faulty reading of MS. G (v. g. 
Gen. 50, 3 ^.^a^^ instead of ^y>.^^) and substitutes a more 
ordinary expression for one that is less common (v. g. Gen. 
50 22 and 50, 26 'i^J:^ instead of y^). The addition of ^J^ 
made by MS. D in Gen. 50, 4 is surprising. 




The two main groups into whicli we have classed our manu- 
scripts are distinguished not only internally by reason of the 
diiiference of translation and of the original from which the 
version was made, but also externally l)y tlie diversity of the 
sections and liturgical readings into which the text is divided. 
A. As to the division of the text, abstracting from the 
liturgical rubrics, it may be said that the first group ("MSS. 
H, K, L, M. N, O, P) presents the following number of sections', 
indicated in the MSS. mentioned entirely or only in part, in 
as far as the MSS. comprise either the whole of the Penta- 
teuch or (inly one or two of the five books 2; 

Genesis 57 sections i'iAyi), 

Exodus 19 sections (i^^^yi), 

Leviticus 13 sections {'i^\yi), 

Numbers 2:! sections (J-os), 

Deuteronomy no divisions. 
At the same time we find other divisions indicated in this 
first group (i. e. in MS. B. N. Ar. Ifi = H which are taken 
over from MS. B. N. Ar. 4 (see above, Chap. Ill, 2): 
Genesis 12 sections (-Irc^l or iiil^), 

Exodus - 11 sections t-lar^l or iii\^), 

' Althougli these sections are called "lections" in the first three books 
of the Pontateuch in this group, yet they may be considered sinijily as 
divisions of the text without rpforcnce to the liturgy, because a rubric 
is added to about onc-lialf of their iiuniber only stating on what day 
this "lection" is to be "read" at the Divine Service. 

2 Compare Swete's Introduct. to the 0. Test, in Greek, Cambridge 
1902, chap. VI, p. 34:2sqij. 

Part I, Chap. YII 107 

Leviticus 28 sections (^Is^l), 

Numbers 36 sections {As^\), 

Deuteronomy no divisions. 
In our second group (MSS. A, B, C, D, E, F, Gj the text 
was not broken up into chapters originally or divisions of any 
kind (see above, Chap. II, \). Now, however, we find indicated 
in MSS. A and F a series of sections corresponding exactly 
to the divisions found in MS. Vatic. Ar. 2 = S (see above, 
Chap. V, 1, and also Part II, Sec. III). Thus: 

Genesis contains 47 sections (J-«as), 
Exodus 26 sections (J-^), 

Leviticus 16 sections (J-oi), 

Numbers 35 sections (J--ai), 

Deuteronomy 18 sections (J-^), 

We shall now proceed to give a complete list of these 
"sections, designating those of the first group by the abbreviat- 
ion we have chosen for the main MS. from which they are 
taken, i. e. "H"— those of MS. B. N. Ar. 4 as »H bis", since 
they have been copied into ' MS. H — those of the second gi'oup 
by "AS" in accordance with the abbreviations used for the 
chief MS. into which they have been introduced eventually 
and for the one in which they are found originally (see above. 
Chap. V, 1, note 2). 

List of Sections found in tlie First Group ("H"j 2. 

8) Gen. 4,8 































5, 32 (Gr. 

6, 1) 
















1 See above, Chap. 111,2. 

5 This text follows the Hebrew order of chapters and verses. 

108 Textual and Liturgical Divi^ons 

17) Gen 

. 8.21'' 

53) Gea 

, 45,17 






























l)Exod. 1,1 










































































- 14) 











27,41 1" 


















30, 25 











1) Lev. 













6,12 (Gr.6, 19) 































Part I, Chap VII 109 

9) Lev. 


ll)Num. 15,17(?) 

10) „ 





11) „ 




19, 1(?) 

12) „ 





13) „ 











21, 10 

1) Num 

• 1,1 




2) „ 





3) „ 





4) „ 





5) „ 





6) „ 





7) „ 


8) „ 



9) » 


No divisions. 

10) „ 


List of Sections from MS. B. N. Ar. 4 ("H bis") 2. 

6) Gen. 25, 19 


1) Gen. 


2) 1, 


3) 11 


4) „ 


5) „ 




















' In group I ("H") we have given 23 sections for the book of 
Numbers. MS. B. N. Ar. 16 (H) itself assigns only 22 J^-^, but it has 
the inscription "second section" twice, at Num. 1,48 and 2,33. 

MS. Pocock. 219 (K), which contains the very same text, titles and 
notes, gives 21 sections for Numbers; but there, too, we find the second 
section (J-«as) indicated twice, Num. 1,48 and 2,33, and likewise the 
twenty-first section. Num. 35, 1 and 36, 1. AVe may, safely assume, there- 
fore, that in each case there is a mistake of the copyist, and that in fact 
the book uf Numbers, in this group, comprises neither 22 nor 21 but 23 

2 This text follows the Hebrew order of chapters and veraes. 

i 10 Textual and Liturgical Divisions 


22) Lev. 

23) „ 



1) Exod. 1, 1 


































27, 20 

1) Num 

. 1,1 





1,49 (?) 









38, 21 








1) : 














(3,12 (Gr.til9) 










































15, 17 












16, 32 (?) 













































20, 23 






Part I, 

Chap, vn 


28) Num, 

. 21, 10 (?) 

34) Num, 

, 27,15 













25, 6 



2(i, 1 



List of Sectious found in 

the Second Group ("AS"')'. 

24) I 







1) Geu. 


































25, 5 ■ 


















28, 10 






29, 1 



10, 1 










































16, 1 












17, 15 












18, 20 



50, 15 




» This text follows the Greek order of chapters and verses. 

The same uumbcr of sections as in MS. Vat. Ar. 2 are also found 
in Florentine MS. Cod. Palat. orient. XXI and in MS. Mxt. 664 of the 
Imperial Library at Vienna (Flijoel's Catalogue, u. 1541). 

1 1 2 Textual and Liturgical Divisions 


1) Exod 

• 1,1 



































• )) 

17, s 









20, 2 















32, 25 















40, 14 




















7) Lev. 


«) .. 

9, 23 

^') ,. 


10) .. 


11) ,. 


12) ,. 


13) .. 


14) ,. 


15) ,. 


16) „ 



1) Num 

. 1,1 

2) ,. 


3) „ 


4) 1- 


5) ,. 


6) „ 


~') 1- 


8) „ 


9) „ 


10) ,. 


11) .. 


12) „ 


13) .. 


14) ,. 


15) ,. 


16) .. 

16, 1 

17) .. 


18) ,. 


19) .. 


20) .. 


21) .. 


22) , 

20, 14 

23) ,. 


24) .. 


Fart I, 




25) Num. 


4) Deut 

. 5, 1 


















13, 1 






14, 1 












16, 1 












18, 1 






20, 1 







27, 1 




31, 1 

1. Deut. 

1, 1 



32, 1 






33, 1 




B. It 

is not our 

intention to 

discuss : 

in detail all th 

liturgical notes found in the MSS. or even to give a complete 
summary of them. Still, it may tend to a better understanding 
of the versions of the two main groups, if we catalogue some 
at least of the "rubrical matter" we have gleaned from our 

"We may premise that in none of the MSS. are these 
indications of liturgical readings noted without omission or 
without mistake. But by comparing the different MSS. of the 
same group we are enabled to establish what appears to be 
a fairly complete list of lections, at least for Genesis. 

We shall confine our remarks to the first book of the 
Pentateuch, because in the other four the "ruljrics" are not 
so numerous as to allow us to assume that we are dealing 
with them in their entirety. At the same time, the notes from 
Genesis alone will suffice to serve the purpose of showing the 
difference in liturgical use between the versions of the two 

1) In our first group, then, we find the following "lections" 
in Genesis: 

BaoDB, Arabic Pentateuch in the Church of Egypt. 8 

114 Textual and Liturgical Dinisions 

Monday evening, first week of the Fast. 

Continuation- of the lesson of Monday evening. 

Tuesday evening, first week of the Fast. 

Wednesday evening, first week of tlie Fast. 

Thursilay evenig, first week of the Fast'. 

Friday, first week of the Fast. 

Monday evening, second week of the Fast. 

Tuesday evening, second week of the Fast. 

^^'ednesday evening, second week of the Fast. 

Thursday evening, second week of the Fast. 

Friday, second week of the Fast. 

Ninth hour of Tuesday of Holy Week. 

Monday evening, third week of the Fast. 

Tuesday evening, third week of the Fast. 

Wednesday evening, third week of the Fast. 

Thui'sday evening, third week of the Fast. 

Friday, third week of the Fast. 

Monday evening, fourth week of the Fast. 

Tuesday evening, fourth week of the Fast. 
9, 18—10, 31 Wednesday evening, fourth week of the Fast. 
10,32—11.9 Thursday evening, fourth week of the Fast. 
11,10—12, 6 Friday, fourth week of the Fast. 
13,12 — 18 Monday evening, fifth week of the Fast. 
15,1 — 17 Tuesday evenng, fiith week of the Fast. 
16,17—17,27 Wednesday evening, fifth week of the Fast. 
18,1 — 19 Feast of the Annunciation. 
IS, 20 — 33 Thursday evening, fifth week of the Fast. 
22,1 —19 Friday, fifth week of the Fast. 
27, 1 — 41 " Monday evening, sixth week of the Fast. 
31,3 — 16 Tuesday evening, sixth week of the Fast. 

' MS. Pocock. 219 adds: (ji*^ Sy-^iji} J^ ^JJI i>j».Vl ^^^ 
Aj r-«aiJ \ i. e. and on the Sunday before Pentecost and over the "water- 
basiu", i. e. at the so-called "Mandatum". Ajj-^aiJI occurs in thfe Copto- 
Arabic MS. Zoega 99, where it renders the Copto-Greek word AAK.VMH = 
pelvis = the basin used at the ceremony of the "Mandatum" or washing 
of the feet on Maundy Thursday. 

Gen. 1,1 - 


„ 1,6 - 


„ 1,14- 


„ 1,24- 

-2, 3 

„ 2,4 - 


„ 2,20- 

-3, 20 

„ 3, 21 - 


„ 4,8 - 


„ 4,16- 


„ 5,1 - 


„ 6, 1 - 


„ 6,5- 


„ 6.9 - 


„ 7,1 - 


„ 7,6 - 


„ 7,11- 


„ 8.4 - 


„ 8,21" 


„ 9,8 - 


Parti, Chap. VII 115 

Gen. 43, 26 — 45, IG Wednesday evening, sixth week of the Past. 

„ 46, 1 — 7 Thursday evening, sixth week of the Fast. 

„ 49,33-50, 26 Friday, sixth week of the Fast. 

In seeking to trace the origin of these lections, we were 

for a long time unable to find in the liturgical books of any 

of the Oriental Churches lessons agreeing with those indicated 

in the MSS. of this group. Thus they differ considerably from 

the liturgical readings of the Coptic Church, of which we shall 

speak presently; and there is also a great diversity between 

our lections and those given by A. J. Maclean in his "East 

Syrian Daily Offices", London 1894. In the latter, for example, 

the lessons for the first week of the Fast are marked thus: 

Monday, Gen. 1, 1—20 

Tuesday, Gen. 1, 20—2, 8 

Wednesday, Gen. 2, 8—31 

Thursday, Gen. 3,1—20 

Friday, Gen. 3,20-24 
At last we hit upon a Melkite Lectionary, described in 
Sachau's Catalogue ', in which the arrangement of the lections 
seemed to be similar to that on our MSS. Dr. H. Pick of 
the Royal Library at Berlin was kind enough to send us an 
excerpt of the lessons of Genesis from this liturgical MS., and 
we found them to be in every instance (except for two or three 
less important variants) in agreement with the lections marked 
in MS. B. N. Ar. 16(H) and its group. Thus the Arabic note 
on fol. 21-'' of MS. B. N. Ar. 16 stating that the MS. was copied 
from a Melkite original (see above. Chap. Ill, 2) is indirectly 
confirmed by the arrangement and extent of the official 
liturgical readings of the Melkite Church. 

2) Of the lections indicated in the MSS. of our second 
group (especially in MSS. A, B, F) it may be said that they 
agree in almost every instance with the readings from Scripture 

1 Verzeichnis der syrisclien Handschriften der Konigl. Bibliothek zu 
Berlin, von E. Sachau. Berlin 1899. Part 11, page 876 (no. 320— Sachac 
74). See also H. Zotenberq, Catalogue des manuscrits syriaques et sabecns 
de Ja Bibliotheque nationale, Paris 1874 — Fonda syi-iaque 10 (ancien I'onds 4). 


116 Textual and Liturgical Divisions 

as they are found iu the official liturgical books of the Coptic 
ClmrchK Taking the different MSS. into account, we obtain 
a fairly complete list of rubrics. Iu one or two instances only 
does the remark in the MS. disagree with the rubric in the 
official books, and even then this seems to be due to the 
mistake of the copyist. 

Besides the readings from the Pentateuch, which have been 
mentioned above (quoting from Tuki"s Euchologium — see 
Chap. V, 2) and most of which are also noted on our MSS., 
we may catalogue the following lections from Genesis: 
Gen. 1,1 — 2.3 Monday of Holy Week, in the morning. 

„ 2, 16 — 3, 24 Monday of Holy Week, at the ninth hour. 

„ 6, 5 — 9, 7 Tuesday of Holy Week, at the ninth hour. 

„ 18, 1 —23 Thursday of Holy Week, -Lakane" (Man- 

„ 22,1 —18 Friday of the sixth week of the Fast. 

„ 22,1—19 Thursday of Holy Week, at the ninth hour. 

„ 24, 1 — 9 AVednesday of Holy Week, at the ninth hour. 

„ 27, 1 — 4P Monday of the fourth week of the Fast. 

„ 28, 10—19 Tuesday of the fourth week of the Fast. 

„ 28, 20—22 Tuesday of the fourth week of the Fast 

„ 32, l"*— 18 Thursday of the fourth week of the Fast. 

„ 32, 19—30 Thursday of the foiirth week of the Fast. 

„ 48, 1 —19 Friday of Holy Week, at the third hour-. 

„ 49,1 —12 Saturday 2 of the seventh week of the Fast. 

„ 49, 33—50, 26 Friday of the seventh week of the Fast 

> On the liturgical lections in the Coptic Church compare : P. de 
Lagabde, Die koptischen Handschriften der Gottinger Bibliothek, in Ab- 
handlungen der histor. philos. Klasse der Kgl. Gesellschaft der Wissensch. 
zu Gottingen, XXIV, 1879; also the "Book of the Holy Pasch" called in 
•|-eKK.\HCIA IJA.\6EAIiApillH Cairo 1899; and the "Katameros" of the 
Coptic Church, which has lately been published by the "Librairie Helio- 
pohs", Eue Clot Bey, No. 24, Cairo, Egypt, under the title: Katameros 
pour tons les jours, les dimanches et les fetes de I'an, 2 vol. in folio in 
Coptic and 2 vol. in Arabic — about 2000 pages. 

2 Called "the Saturday of Lazarus'' = the Saturday before Palm Sunday. 


To summarize, then, the results of this our Study from 
eighteen Arabic and Copto-Arabic MSS. of the Pentateuch, 
we may draw the following conclusions: 

1) There must have been in use in the Church of Egypt 
two distinct Arabic versions of* the Pentateuch, one in the 
Melkite, the other in the Jacobite (Coptic) Branch of the 

2) These two versions were most likely officially recognized 
translations, since they are found not only in a large number 
of representative manuscripts, but also in such manuscripts as 
bear every indication of having been employed in the Liturgy. 

3) For collating and supplementing their sacred volumes, 
the Christians of Egypt made use of other Arabic versions 
besides, notably versions made from the Hebrew (Saadias 
version' and others'); and even the Samaritan-Arabic ^ version 
was known to them and utilized by them. 

Moreover, it seems to us that the Arabic version of the 
Pentateuch in the Melkite Church is older'' than that used 
by the Copts; for in the MSS. of the latter we find a great 
number of variants which are manifestly taken from the Melkite 
version, but not vice versa s. 

The Arabic translation of the Pentateuch read in the 

1 See Chap. V, 1. 

5 See Chap. Ill, 2 and Chap. V, 4. 

3 See Chap. Ill, 1. 

* Compare "Introduction", towards the end, where we have pointed 
out an historical reason why the Melkite Arabic version is probably 
older than that of the Coptic Church. 

5 A detailed discussion of the nature and import of the variant 
readings goes beyond the scope of our present inquiry. 

1 18 Conclusion 

Coptic Church was made from the Coptic text directly, and 
only indirectly from the Greek of the Septuagint. This is, 
vre think, beyond doubt. But as to the Melkite version, the 
investigation of the original whence this translation was made ' 
presents various perplexing problems which might well form 
the subject of a special and interesting critical text-study_. 
For on the one hand the text agrees in many respects with 
the Septuagint, especially in Lucian's recension, on the other 
it shows decided affinities with the Hebrew Bible and with 
the Syriac of the Peshitto. 

See Chap. Ill, 2 and 3. 


Note I found on a double fly-leaf in MS. B. N. Ar. 12. 

Ce pentateuque arabe est una version faite sur le Grec. 
Ainsi les enfants dAdam et ceux de Noe se rapportent pour 
le temps de leur vie a la supputation des Septante. Au dc- 
nombrement fait au Livre des Nombres chap. I Gad est place 
apres Benjamin. Au second chapitre du meme livre le terme 
Tay/ia "ordo" est conserve dans I'arabe en lui donnant une in- 
flexion arabe. Abiu fils d'Aaron est appele Abiud comme 
dans les Septante aussi bien que Gedson au lieu de Gerson. 
Au 29 vers, du cb. Ill du raeme Livre des Nombres on lit 
Dael pour Lael et cb. IV v. 2 viginti au lieu de triginta, 
lorsqu'il est dit dans I'flebreu ques les Levites serviront depuis 
30 ans jusqu'a 50. 

II y a peut-etre quatre ou cinq endroits ou la version arabe 
suit I'Hebreu; sans doute que le Grec qu'on traduisait avait 
une autre le^on que le notre. Si I'on voulait marquer tons 
les endroits ou I'arabe et le Grec sout d'accord et contraires 
k I'Hebreu on ne fiuirait pas. Ajoute que presque tous les 
noms propres d'homme ou de ville sont ecrits en caracteres 
grecs au dessus de I'arabe. On voit souvent entre les lignes 
des mots arabes qui ne sont que de purs synonymes de ceux 
sur lesquels ils sont places. C'est I'ouvrage du copiste ou de 
quelqu'un qui aura 6te possesseur de ce raanuscrit. 

Les marges sont assez souvent chargees d'ecriture, voici 
quel en est I'usage. On y marque fort rarement et en deux 
mots tout au plus le sujet du chapitre. Mais on y met tres 
souvent une deux et trois expressions synonymes de celles du 

1 See Chap. Ill, 1. 

120 Appendix I and H 

texte. On y corrige quelques fautes du copiste. On y rap- 
porte des opinions des Juifs mais tres rarement. On y fait 
observer aussi 2 ou 3 fois les differences qui se trouvent entre 
I'Hebreu et le Grec. On remarque par exemple qu'il n'y a 
aucun texte hebreu oil on lise Cainan parmi les descendants 
de Noe, mais on n'y dit rien sur les aunees des patriarches 

Dans le 29 chapitre' des Nonibres 11 y a une page dont 
la marge est remplie d'un long texte qui se lit dans I'Hebreu 
et dans les Septante comme le copiste a soin d'en avertir en 
ajoutant que ce morceau manquait dans le manuscrit qu'il a 
copie. II faut observer que la Genese est intitulee Livre 
Premier dans un titre courant sur toutes les pages et les 
quatre autres sout comme les Septante, I'Exode, le Levitique, 
les Nombres et le Deuteronome ces quatre mots traduits 
en arabe. 

L'auteur de cette version est Gergis comme ecrivent et 
prononcent les arabes c'est ;i dire Gregoire - selon notre 

Voici comme il fiuit sa traduction. 

Super manum intirmae creaturae Dei in scientia et in opere 
Gergis ben Alcis abil mupadal ben Amil al JNlolouc ,_ycoi.^ 
<iJJl i_9iJ clLjl cy^* c?? ,J-«ii-Jl ^\ ^'s^\ 1^, favor (seu 
benignitas) Dei (fuit) in vigesimo octavo die mensis Abib anni 
millesimi sexagesimi noni martyrum sanctorum (Christi 1363), 
qui respondet vigesimo diei mensis Gomadi posterioris Hegirae 
anni 754. 


Last page (fol. B**) of the Introduction preceding Genesis ^ 
in MS. Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424. 

» The lacuna extends from 28, 23 to 29, 5 incl. See Part I, Chap. Ill, 
note 1. 

' "Gergis", ^ j i ^s^^is ., is the Arabic for George, not Gregory. 
3 See Chap. IY\ 4." 

Appendix II 121 

<*.J-e.^ ^^ UL^l i_i.JI i^^UrJ' ^_yUi».JI a43-> >Lk«3J. «4,.^ rr"-^. 

ly.jiji ^_jk^ li3.s^-°-?. |J i.iLJ-s«j U-vvJ U^il iJLa-?.^ r-ob Uy-ji-^l 
j-ob A,XjiX^ '■'^3> '■'--'-'^U L^ji.,_»ixJ la^^X,«j» l-^j-vJI i\,^\ <*.,L43iJl 
l_jj^li 145.^;^^ rt'^'^ l^JM^Jl i^^Wj^^ j^Li*. ijj.^ 0^3 '^■^^ r^ 

^^bc^l ^^\ (sic!) -J^^^-U 'y^j i<^*^' )^^ br^-** i_5^=^ b'iil^jUtl 




The texts comprise Chapters I to VI, XVIII and L of Genesis. As 
explained in Part I, Chap. VI, the texts given in Section I anil Section II 
represent a "normal" text of the two main groups, respectively, a tenta- 
tive restoration of the original text obtained by collating the several 

Variants of the different IMSS. are designated by the capital letter 
which stands for the manuscript in which they are found; variants written 
above or below the text or on the margin of the MSS. are designated 
by an Arabic exponent to the right of the capital letter. Thus, v. g.. A' 
indicates the first (or the only) variant found in MS. A, A' another 
variant in MS. A; variants with the same exponent, however, need not 
necessarily have been taken from the same manuscript. For on expla- 
nation of the "normal'' text see Part I, Cliap. VI; see also List of 
Abbreviations in Part I, Chap. II. 

For the peculiarities of language in these texts we refer to G. Graf, 
Der Sprachgebrauch der iiltcsten christlich-arabischen Literatur, Leipzig 
1905. It may be noticed tliat in Group I Hamza is generally not written, 
while in Group II it is placed fairly consistently; Teshdid is used quite 
frequently in both groups; I\[edda, however, occurs only exceptionally in 
any of the MSS. 

.Section III contains the text of MS. Vat. Ar. 2 (sec Part I, Chap.V, 1); 
Section IV the text of MS. Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424 (see Part 1, Chap. IV, 4). 


(MSS. H, K, L, M, N, O, P) 

j^UJ* ^y ^y <^JJ1 

J6^ LJl^ *LJI ^^^ vi-oU ^^^^ Ul k^5 .>J^ cr^J <^AJ1 Jli^ 6 

(-,-o_j ^L\ cus.-^ i3>>-' ^ ••UJ \ i^j^, ^^ \ ij-'*^^^ ~>S.i.\ i^JJ \ 5-^-0^ 7 

^^IS^ l^*.^ ^(S^ Cf-^i^ ''^Jl <^^( ^_$^rs U-^ ^>-m <^il^ l^J'3 8 

^a.\j j*sr° Jl U.~-J1 CUs:^ ^_,XJ\ sL^Jl e*^f-'^^ <^1 J 1^5 9 

j:U-c>JI ^juaP'" ^1 !il^\ c^A.,^;;^!^ cJJjj ji^ ^j-^-^'^ x^'^-t^i 

.UJI yiJ^ 'IjLs.'' »UJ1 5^15* ^_ji^O| fiUjl ,jr-^l ^^1 5,j«-o\5 l<i 
.^.....^ ^s^ »jy l^;b &J^.^J^ OV >;^J1 j^=^J ^:U\ JLs, 11 

5 N ^j^i-*^^ >* ^■ j>)\ ' N jl^V 8 K ^^-vUsw (sic) 

■\- Xnrmal Text of Group I |<ien. 1, 13—26] 

<UJ\ y^ij Ji>j\\ J-ft ' i~Jlsr^' %s^ <>^» »jy> ^JJl \r^ ;->l-o 

\h1^ u -kv^ — L«.<ao ^v;»* Lm-wc lIj^5 ^ ^ 
fl^^5 O^j^h <Cj'-«iL»JU liyLJ, J^l ^-O, ^Ltr-Jl ^.^ 
jUJ^ ^lii J^^Ml ^ l_^K,>Jj U--JI jAiw ^i L^-oUi L^.l^ 15 

,_jsr-J^ j^i ^w.y j^-^^i^ 

jpj'^l J* ^-u;J U->Jl jd^ j, <UJ\ UaJi-i. 17 
^._^ '^1 viUi ^1 ^f 
J* s^U. ^ ila. "V^5 Cj^jIj^ ■'»L^"i)\ \^ <)JJ1 Jli"^ 20 

^,1 <iJ}\ ^ki^ d^-^J ^l^ l:'^> ^i'J» ^j L!,,--;U^IS »UJ\ 

_,ls^* J ^_^1 »U^1 \^\^ l^_^lj \_^\ Mj.IS <UJ1 f^.^.i 22 

jj~^jL. ' * ^^ _L— «o ^^'S, L»wc ^^»j 23 
"••e^\ Ol^i U,--^ i;^ L-^i-i J=;^( EJ*^^ •*^* J^(5) 24 

^;^UL*r». ^_^ \»,wj_J^ \_i4^^^> l^,v«<aS L)L»J1 fJ-^aJj <)JJ I Jlj*} 2ti 

10 K Lj»ij II N fUift 12 i.f. jiiU^j 13 X y UN ;>s^l 

[Gen. 1,27— 2, 9] Part II, Section I 5* 

l4,.J.e U^^l^ J>y'^i\ \^\^ \^\^ L.»il ^il» aUI l*.«^^b^ 28 

tjx^- t)) ^^-^ ^r^ '^^'^ <i '^ ^^ ^5 ^"'j"^-'' *^^ i3y •^=^>?. 

Ijrj. io^.~^o^ ^Jb lili ''<)^aX-o uI^ <)JJI j^^ 31 

^>L.j f^j r'-C"^ o'^J '■^^'^ 0*^5 
U-^^Xo-, ^.^^^^ ^\^^} iU-^vkJl OJ~»^3 1 II 

»;-oj ^1 <)^JUI Ux>l ^J( <xJL»«.l J^S" 

.^JUI ijiiw j,_jj^ IXJLlua^ jl i^'j'i'l^ U->~J( iiia. ''-t_jUJ IJ.A 4 

(Jj J=;NH ,^=.5 J^ 1^ J^l ^S^. (J aUI £jNJ ^*^. ^\ J^S 
^.^.^i. l..»»jiJ ^LvJ^)\ .Las !(l^\ ^.».»»«J 

1 N <>^i\ (sic) 2jv' ^U:.-o. 5.^.»i» 3 N — 1— AjbjJl 1 l:\IN' 
\JoU> * N l-o 

13 L 1 JjUU (sic) 

6* Normal Text of Group I [Gen. 2, 10—25] 

, Ob JJ \ Jvs>. V?. liTUjb. ' ^X-L^gj 1 

,^svi\. j.»J».Ml Ovi^J* '-^^f^. '^^>»} '>^^ Jfj"^^ ^^^ k— ^*>« 12 

^^i^\ J>^\ jk. k^. ^JJl yb^ ^l^^ ^LiJl ^^Jl <^\5 13 

Ol>JI 5^yi ;J=r^Jl ^>5 

-.^^juJl ^i>ji j, <^X*i^3 «(^iX^ ^jiJl ^j^L»JV\ <}JM\ Jjjll J^lj 15 

j.;.^ 5j^5 ^yb. ^1 3^L^NU ^^^...^s-. NJ .^Vl iIj^I -"JUfl 18 

^\^ U^\ ^ Ji^ Jiil ^^^5 J^ J=/J\ ^^ ^Ul ^a^5 19 

L<^^*j\ »^9 <j^<^A. L-^i-j 'do ",_,^« 

.JvJjo L»j. Jjta.5 du>^>i\ Jowl Jsji.1^ fUi LiU-^' f^l ^ «)JJ\ ,_yiJU 21 

y>\ J,\ L^p^ il^^l fM ^^ »JvrL\ ^JJI ji-^l ,J.JMl iJl,y\ LiJU 22 

»l_^l Ujj' sJ^jb ,_j^ 1^ p-i» ^_5-<^ cr^ r'** *^ 0>^^ ?^* (Jl-" 23 

^^0.5 iS\j^h JvoJo., <)Jl3 HgUi J^y\ ^yo. cU> J^\ 10^^ :i4 

I (ilosseina 2 N — J^_5^. ^ KL sic; N J^ J^p", lineola 

appositsi, lit videtur, lul delendum ^ <N -|- ^l • N i^L^J'^Lj 

c N \iU ' sic orancs » N ^:x^*^ ' ^' '-fer^v '" ^ cr*^ 

^11 N »yl (sic) '2 N J-*»^ iJ X - UjbUf 1* X + *yy>^.5 

(sic J V. supra v. 16) 

[Gen. 3, 1 - 14] Part II, Section I 

)is\3 •)> <iS}\ f^ ju ^ ^-^i i\j^ :l^\ cuJiii <iJ)i\ Cjji\ 

^3^y.J\ ^ i^ 3 Js- ^ JiU r^^ 2il^\ CUJli- 2 

ijy»j ^L^ u^i b_^ M^ 

^lj^^' Ijyo ^_y--<J isl^^ i^* ^:xlli3 4 
i^LJ^So'^ U^^-^^' Joi.-o' U3J-C ^^jl^b" j,y. j,^! jfijo ,*JJI j;_^ 5 

6^^.^\ syi-J 'iSj^ Uj\^ JSUJI ^1^^ »/f^^^ o' ''^j^' ^1'5 '^ 

L<gJj<-J cJbA\^ CUi^li Uo-Jr-flJ" j;^ »! _-oM 1 O j^l-s j-ii-i-J ^ i-U»^^3 

^^b^ 'Jj_j^j'^ CUi-i? ^^>yL^\ j3 L-ioU kiLJ^^ CUji-^-^ JUi 10 
j-^^JI ^^ ,_,5-Uk*l ^A ,_jA^ CUJ-Arw ^\ 'i\^\ ^\ f>\ Jlii 12 
aJ^jiI* "j^^" viLJls \Xa> C-Jjii M *-^'' <*J'^1 Cjj^\ JLis 14 

1 N J-isl 2 M 'i\^^\ 3 N + ;Uj'\ 4 N ;Uj"\ » N - ^ 

sic omnee, pro jjU n N ^_^Lxi 12 N LB.oi.Ji 13 jj i3\yii\^ 1* N 
^V '5 N ii\_;^SU, sic fere semper is N iXJ.1 (j-^-^^-"^* i'' N ,^y^' 

BaoD£, Arabic feutateuch in the Cbuich uf Egypt, 9 

8* Normal Text of Group I [Gen. 3, 15—4, 6] 

j^^ „* U^ijj cr^i ^^)) orrr^i ''r^* o-:;^5 '^■^'^ "j'"^ f^S ^^ 
^.jJJ ^U:^M'o. JJ.^3^"5 ail^=..l J:i\ iy^ J>\ n"\^\U J'JS^ 16 

^\ 'iys^^'^ CJ-* ^^^^"^'5 ^'\^( Or-=> ^^^^--^ ^'il f^"^ J ^5 17 

cUL^ fill t:^*^ Ut^ J.S'Ij iJLi^b^ 
Jii.\ ^-ixt JS'b'^ cU .r-^" ^yLJi\^ viU^\ 18 

kr-« C5^' J'.^^' J' >!^' o>^ ^rr^ J^^" -^^^^^i 3f^i 19 

J^ Js ^l Uj-Sl \^ ii3\^\ fM Ujsi 20 
Uv-r-"!^ >^\ ,^ J<^'^ s^l^M^ f>M <»JM\ Cj^\ s-L-o^ 21 

cf^' J^^'^l ^3 J-*^ rrr*-J' ^5V cr* "^^^ S^y' "<)^yi.U 23 

^-ojJDI y^\j «_-^joUI ^^>^ J-?'-'^ d»-.'.5L>o<j JiJ^ f>i rj^^i 2"^ 
iiUi.\ isj.s^ Ji.^^' iL^JJiJ^l 13^U1 »2v_.^ '^r^5 
C-Jl3j '^i>r^^ *^-^J5 v^^^^ <Jol^\ \^ fil ^^J 1 IV 

vILiyJ '->^y> <>^' »;-*J cr* Cr:^-*^ S-''^ f^* "^^ O*^ ^^ 3 
'S^ib Ji.0^ J-ol4^ iS]\'^.y^ L«3JU.*jj <)^.»^^LSj1 ^^ J-c^'-* S-''-^5 * 

viMa^^ ,,r- ^* (J5 >-^j=>- 0;-« 1>UJ cr^.'-*-' ''^■''^' vV J*-" 6 

■4 N i:i\yc\ ^\ i N A;i2^53^ 6 X - Ji^ ' N ^'^ 8 N J^b 

» N J^L^J "> X ^^^ " K deest v. 23 

i> N ^b M KN lijLsxXJ 15 sio semper 

" L O^lj" bis 18 X Ajb J>^ 

[Gen. 4, 7—19] Part IT, Section I 9* 

^yo. viJ^J j..^! CU^k=Lli (J ^1^ .iLU J^ CU.U^=^1 i^\ 7 

14^1 ij-f-*-* ^^'5 *^>^^ 

(iJJCiii <*.-v:H iJ^L* ^.6 ,^j>^}i ^j.lj> Ll>_^ 1 ^(3 |j|L_.iX^ 
ijLs?. »2^ls JjU Ji- ^^ cUJ^ ^_^ <0^1 Oyi ^J JUii 15 

i>-Ov>w< (_y»-^. i^'^i ry"^ dj^35 '"^'^^'■f^^^ i*.ilj^' j^jJoLs v_9ys5 17 
i5j^>|\JLv«3 '^J^.^^J-<=-» -^J^ ''^^^r^^ '^^'j-^ C-?"^^ "^.J^ ^^ 

U»».^_j O^. >i'^'^5 '^"~? (J* A-<ol^ 2 Nj^ (sic) 3 N ijl 

* N »_^5 '• sic omnes; lege ^J^iH g M iJ«* j^j^ (sic) ' N <i^^S 
8 N c>5^^3 » L lil*^ (sic), N l-*)lj 10 N deest i^j J»;'^^ '*^j 
11 L Ult_^ (sic), N U^Ls 12 N crr^jlJ" 1^. (sic) » K il_^, N jlJ^ 
n N J-o_\*s.O (sic) 15 N J.^\_j3:\^^ is I, jvliiyu N J.>Jo^AU 
" N crr:"^"lj^* 18 K M N l*4jj"^>^^ i^ N — sUaJ; videtur esse 

scribendum: Ai>l , i. e. alia scriptio nominis \>\i, quae ex margine tan- 
dem iuvecta est in ipsum textum, ideoque delenda 


10* Xormal Text of Gronp T [Oeu. 4, 20—5, 8] 

^.^i^5 3._^i^i ^s^ ^ j;' j^ .•*5 ' J^t^y. '^^ ^^W 20 

«cu=L\. jo.j^l, ^ys^J* ^\^ ->s .*5 •■J-cJy CjJ^J^ :il--»5 22 

I'U^U, ^y^ '"^j ^-^^-^^ '■'(j^' J-=^' cy Jy^ ^^^-^' 

^,oi-_^- ^M ^;j-< ajU crr^-'^ 0-* r^-^. ^'-»^^' «>j>-;-^ ^^.io. '-'^^jli 24 

,i..^\ c-jijj '■'^LcUi Cj^J^i cuUsi' >;:=- ii.*J-y\ ^>\ 25 
j^u J JO _^T .jo^ J, fis ^i\ j^\ ^^^ "=Ju^ 

^^\ l^;j. ^>S ^i^ JiyI <i^-.-^l lft->5 "f^ "'Ju--^ jJ^j 26 

.iJ'iJi Cjj-I> (►•^Ij *y>>^. 

^y\ ^ jJloi d^,ui ^.- *> j (_j-^'-* ^—"■CV**' 1^*5 ^ 

jj«. ^^j-v^L-) j<"^5 ^Lo 5-;-»^ ij^y^^ ^ ^^5 '*''"^ c-~^ '-^'^■c^ 'S'^i '' 

iijLx^\j, N jUjDIj 1 L J-:r?y., JI J-:^y. N ^;_,^by U>j.\ 

c L JI Uj«j (M J-n^y) J-^?y. ••^-^^j, N ^M>-»-> cxH'-' ^-^ ^^^-^^^ ■" N 
»Lv>»-J 8 ^' UvJ *! N (_r> * ' " N J^j ' ' N f y* 

iJ M ,_y.;-»iaJo (sic) X ^Xi-JL-oXj (sic) la N v. 21: ^l Jj>.\ ,;^-« 

j^j.*ji,^^ d^sL.^ (_J,\ (sic) ii'-«'^» Cr:>?.'^ hlsL-iJ" i-ja^A^ J^i >« N 

<^-^») '■'■ X Lol, suprascriptura Ui^ lo L ^-^^-^rr"' " M L«^ 

18 <*oL» sic fere omnes semper 

[Gen.5, 9— 28] Part II, Section I 11* 

^^I-LO <*J ■^^^ I ^^.W ^^_^J!..>«0« AiLo |_pjjj' ij^'^'i ^ 

^k^wj -,UXft ^,4^.,,tt,? <^iLo J,^-**j /^LLo '^^J wXJa l.xjvjl_> ^«'*->l ^_J^^5 1 - 
l^Lo ^ jjj>*^A-J ■*< q "^.^ ^jLo ^.■h^O l^V' lT** g^.* o *^ tV;^* ^^ 

j^Lo Ji ^^y<J..u> «->^; aSLo ^x^ ^<S.^ l^^ ^ g^ »-> ''o>'^3 ^'^ 

9j-,.;JUj'^ A.iU 5^^^ '■'5'-?. •*"' ^S "^l-cJ^JO ^J_^\)^U3.-0 ^1^5 16 


l!1jLo aJ ^^^4-0 

j:_jU^I <iJ j^J^^ i-Lco ^..;J:-cj^ i-^^.-yo'l^ iiLc '>_jb ^U^ 18 

vxlj^ iLl.*v i.iL« '3^1.^ r>'^^ "^ '^■'j '^ '^■^^ k>^ '^j^. ij-'^^i 19 

joJ ^<<L.w |^-*Xa«jj ^^_y,v^l ^Lo j,i*o ">jIj o^'^ '^ 5-:^^ '"C''^5 ^'^ 

J_i>jX/« <*J >>.J« LovXJO '^^XiLI ^J^^i *JJ^ f^'-*'^" ji^-^l |^.«-..i».l« 22 

, ;L>^.^ a *v^-0 ^J i^'aa 

t M — .LU) 2 jr _ ^ 3 L — j_jiU^ U9i|ue ad J^y )i4^ 

9 ML o>^5 '" M O*^ " L Cr«^ '^ M CrT^* '' ^^ cr^ 
14 M ^- t -^ 15 M deest v. 25 '6 M gx«o n L Cj^$ 

12* Nortnal Text of Group I [Gen. 5, 29—6, 12] 

MJ\ Ua-^ ^_yXJ^ J=jM\ ^^^ l-^.Jol 

^^ L>J »|^ (jJ^s^li OU.--=>- ^1-^1 O'-o s,JjJl yj ^1_^ 2 
J^\ ^ yt^J( ^UJ\ ^V J o^5^ C--^^--^" ^ '^^^ S^y^ J^5 3 

Ja.\ ^^ ^> J.SU ^^^ J=,_jM\ J.* V^il f^Ml 'ilij (3 0*^5 4 
(^ O'^. '-o*^ >y^* ^"-^ J-' *y^^ <>-'^' "r^ "*o* 

Jpj^J\ ,^, ^^ .JUil=L ^^.JJ\ y±^\ i_j>JJM <OV\ Oyi Jlii 7 

iiJ'i)! i^Jl flJji i^Jii -y «J^^ 8 
'^■5 f^5 f^ dy^ ^•^^ c^ ^"^i ^'"^ 

1 INI >_,~-»^ 2 L crr-«'3 (sic) ' M c>^ * M 5<-»J » L 
^y»^^^ c [j v.iUsbj 7 ]\[ — 14J 8 M in margine ^►.-^^\ ^-o 
» M + 0-* '" M — ^;^1 11 L M ^-o (sic) 12 L Ji^, M ^;Jl^ 
i> ^^^l;*-^^, i. e. L ";L'l>.>..i 14 fortasse deest verbum i' L 0-»io 

18 sic omnes, i. c. 0^^-^>5 ■' M — <»J'^\ 's lege: ^>_;^' o^ 

[Gen. 6, 13—22, 18, 1—5] Part 11, Section I 13* 

O--:^'* CJ-:^^ .x^--ij. ^ ^^o, ^^^^J\ ^ ^^x^ j,.iL«3^l ^ ^^^ 19 
^ ^^5 i.^,J. ^t)U^J\ 3 cr-'^ ^^-;i U-Jl ,^ 3 ^^ 20 

»_^^Ajkll cj'^ 'o<iv.iL^ v_ib 
ls»5» LoCU" \^ls J Uj. 5 iilj" lilj jki <*,-^^^jo ~.y.jbji\ ^y^^ 2 

\JJL<b ijjiil Jlis |j,j-v3^ IJub J^jo^ C>>'^'^".? 'i^^ C^y^'''^^ ^ 

• M b^U, sic semper 2 probabilius est glossema 3 IX-JL^o, i. e. 
cameratara, vel convexam (rectius) ■• M ^ii~sui «_^^j«jJ '■> vel 

\^JL:otJ? 6 sic omues ^ L ■^^ fij> 8 L L-o^\ a M v_$j*'» 

^j-^ (sip) 41 M L ^UiJ 11 M L »U^ 12 M jjii' sic, L JJiJ"? 

14* Xormal Text of Group I [Gen. 18, 6—22] 

^^\ '^^ J IS. k^Lo Jl Lji.\ J,\ J^>; (►^yl tr'^i 6 

^^^L»J »lk»l^ ''^■^ '^**^J "^^ J^U iy^ lJ,1 (•-r^y^ tj*^^3 ^ 

^IS ^«,« lysii (►v' <*^J>-^-^» z^-^ kJ'^^ J-?^ 5 '^i l-U-~- S~^\j 8 

Is^j^f^J' .^Ua:' Ui> (^_)b J..;* f-tr-^ '}^ UilS 
j, 2j^b ^A \iyt L* <jJ Jls vilj"\^\ ii;Lo ^>>,\ <jJ ^1 JUi 9 

3^yo.^ JjIS ^^.^- C^Ji^l IJ^ Jiu ^k cLoT ^^\ 1J\ JUi 10 
Uil i_;lj vX-^ 1^^ sjl^ cXst.*— ) UD^ j^->\ ^iO\_«\ iijL^ 

•A !s\Uo C-^AS• j»4j^ljl (i LoiJi. Li-Uj j>,s LilS ii\Lj» ».>ab-i\« 11 

i3>^5 Ci"^' (i' *^ L^ O^. vjy' ^^^ Lf„^.JJ ^ CUSLsT^ 12 

•Li) »X9 

>^\ CUs^l IJsjb >J-^ ij, is\j* rrr*T o^^' i.^ "'AJJI >xii Jjt 14 

(»-v*^l (_5-«^ CJ* ''^'-*= UlLo ^_;i-i-^ ,J-«-) tjjjl (JUi 17 
Jpj'^l jB-«\ g,. ,-. <>o viJ,L^"« »_<_<.$'« (*-»--Ji* ''i-s^l ^^^. *"^*r?' IB 

^►AbLka.* (_^>>-U yXS ^ jy«U<. j,oJ^*o ^';-«o ii^'^ <■ 'jJI J'^5 20 

1 L Ow»-uj (sic) s L J^l> 2 M c>>^3 * L M v3y ' 5^<^ 

cfr. V. 12 5 M — «!aj\ c M *^\ ' M ^^ 

[Gen. 18,23—33; 50,1—4] Part TT, Section I ' 15* 

Jul ^^L-i ^^i,\±\ ^ jU\ .iLM^" V JIS^ c^j^' ^■^ 23 
J^\ ^ 2_yi.*i- NJ^ jM^sa^'t i^.^xjl ^3 l^b ^3,...*^ ^U ^1 24 

LiiiJl IJ..A 

\J JLis ^.^^1 ^^-^ CjJ^:^3 L-lJli ^^^ r^j?' *-<^ ^'^' 29 
j.1^^ ^U ^_;.^MI ^Laij^Jl si-a c:..Jj3 «li\ lil Jij b JLii 32 

js^-ixjjl ^J-=^l CJ'° '-*^-^' ^1 (Jbti i(_.i,j. ijJUA 
^^^kls:«-J' kis? »b\ l^kls:?. ^^\ ** j-rJaIs:»-J ^ '»->-■r^* '-*^y. y°^ ^ 

CUi^i ^^j-J^L::»-J ^ ^bl J^$o aJJ^ ^\l Ley. cr:cajj\ ^ ly^^ 3 

^u ^;^i uiu ^;;,^s^ ixji^Nj LJ.--y. J Is b;^i ?bl CUJIju Oi 4 

^-y^^iili Oy'j-* d*^"*^ *3 'y>" *-0-J«-> (IfS'^A-^ (J 

I L !iU.lii.\ 2 M \^*J' 3 M ^bs. < M JiU. 5 M 

\yis.\ 6 M t«\M 7 K S'^^i^ (sic) 9 K in margine IXL'^I 

9 K cr^J*^ (sic) 

16* Normal Text of Group I [Oen. 50, 5— 19] 

^iLJi (►~jil Ui' siJbl _-Ji\ j^juot cy^j^ J'-" 6 


lIaa;1^. ^ l9\i 

,j\ ^i f.4^1^ ^yu. 

^^..--wks <>J.i*"M Cjjl-O. j^Uo j^ c'-^^ i*JC« ^OJ^J>-<»i 9 

6>iJLL» i^ui 5^>;V\ ^ (3 ^1 v^ ^^ J"^' ti' 'y'* 10 

fbl aa.^ ''^^ 'SLJl ij-»*i *>>-=^ JoJkic S|,^_ji6 *l.a.^ 'doJ* 

Ob^^ y^ (3 ^>^' r^ O'y"^ 

»L>\ Ij^-^JLJ \^,xji-D ""'^^JJI AjjiH« -ya^ (j\ i_Lw^ 2^^ 1^ 

i_i-»i^ ,JjJ lyis vJl;U Jsj" (.Jbb \ ^1 c-Ilx.!^ SjtLI '"^^ Oi 15 
^blj .<J'3-< J^" »..^l jJbl ^1 20AJ lyis^ '-»—'>?. li' V-^ 1^^ 

j-o.\^\ 21^1 j..;^ jj^^ ^r^b J^"' o''-"^ ^ ^. 'jJ>*» 

^i <*J ULs M t_iL«jy. bLJ 
>i)j.>^ ^ \iy«, ^ \^lJi^ IB 
Lil ^\ J,\ J^l ^^ \^,JxiJ' ^ eJL-^^. ^ JL« 19 

' K y^a^ (sic saepius) ' N — Jpj\ » N JJi-o^ < K ^U» (sic) 
' -^' O^r^* ^ ^' — ^1-^ ' N 4-^" 8 K ^.^Jift ^\y (sic) 

• N 5(1^ (sic) 10 N iiwUJ\ n \^\ sic omnes; lege: (*)'y, ut 

in V. 10 iJ N >iU> u N ^-o ^JX* lyjii^ i< X -S^-o s^Jsji-l 
15 K in margine: ^y>^ fl^" ^^l '6 N ^^JJ\ " N ^^ (sic) 

IS N U-^ i« N \.^.^jS so N — <»J si N AJJ\ 

[Gen. 50, 20—26] Part II, Section I 17* 

jy;\ ^;:.^ ^b J ;u ^^\i ^b J, '(^-^.^ (^i aij 20 

Ij^^ U..^X^ ^^ _i.Lo ^^5 ■• Jl-v:».l iiij' f'ji'ii' I— i-»»J_j^, v3b5 23 

(,-ofc^l UUo^J ^_^l j_yXJI Ja^^ll (Jl ^^"^' *^* cy c^-^j^} 

(j Sjijajj.* s^k-ls? ^^^-L»j 'r**^9 *iLo (^ I yb« i_s.— j^j CJUi 2(j 

7-^ J=;' ^ jrr" ^y^' 

1 N (►^UjJ 2 K lylsxj (sic) 3 K N CU-:-J>l 4 N 4- oJj 



(MSS. A, B, C, D, E. F, G) 

J=.jM\^ i*U--Jl ,OJ\ JX^ ^wV-Jl t^ 1 I 

'i^yjl ^IS, ";^\ 10^^ <OJ\ Jls, 3 

20^*1 20Uy ^L.^ 
24Uw»U 23^^.5 SL^I ^^.^ 221^^ jj^ '-'cA^' '^^ J ^5 6 

28CU3^" 27^JJ1 ^U\ ^^ iSi\ 2r.J^^ SMjJi^ ,JJJ\ jX^j 7 

32jJ^.\ 31^^ 3n^JJ\ ^U\ ^^^^ 29jJi.\ 
J6^ J . J£^ U...^^ 35^\ 34j\^^ ,L^ ,xU.l <OJ\ 33^_^^ 8 

1 B 0>5U-^\ 2 B CUiir JsjVlj 3 Fi (A<?) R *^.y>, Z D 
^jb 'i^,^ « K A.,Xsrv^ M5 ■• ZZ>DEi ijjkj\ JUifer^ c Z 

Z" D j* ">^^ ' Z D i3*J>J\ 8 Zi El ^l-f;}, r ^.i^ CUJU^ 

9 Ai F' El R Jiy , Zi ^JUV .JUiU, Z Cj^" v:^^ "■' D oy^ 

I'ZD^y '^ ^^y 13F'_)^>^;>1 u Z o->^>a. -^ol . D l-L»»a. d^\ 
i-' Z D R ^f^i 16 R — ^-^ n Z D Bi Ei Ui^ 18 Z D <)o\ 

J^l LvJ\ U'i> OJiJIj ^U3-J\ i9EisU--» » A BRT J5\ fifJ., 

z J5M\ f^, zi D J5^\ f3-J\ t^ 21 _z ,^^ o^i■ c>i^ o^» 

»L^1 ia*c^, Z' D idem, sed .xl^ loco CJ^ " deest in R 2' A 
B E 0^.5 24 z D ^J>^_ Oi^i " ^' ^^^ D IjLJ (sic) 

20 Z Zl D R J^^\, 27 D (_^l 28 Z' J-«--\ i.;^U 29 Z OLJJ\ 

3" B — ^J^\ etc. 31 Zl Uy i-^Ls 3! z C1j*-^K Ai -\- oUJ^ ^^LSLi 
33 Z V. 8: ^^--ow <Jl ,*aj\ j_5\^3 *U-.J1 <Jl ^.LJJ\ ^\ U>3; ]) idem, 
sed J^\ loco O'-r^K et Ulliw l,,oo ^^^--^i^ 3i E R ^K* as C 

E R + CUi "3« 1) ^LiJ\ (.^\. z j_,iliJ\ f^ Z' LjG Uy. Z2 

[Gen. 1,9 — 18] Part 11, Section II 19* 

^tt^ Jl 'U-J( •'^sJ" 3^JJ1 2^UJ1 '5*:^^ ^' J^"j !• 

19*.^ 18<!^tj^ ^1'ij^ 165-;^^. 161^^.^ *J?^5 «M3<-^5 ^'"^^■'■''■^ 



^J^ ^b:i jpj\J\ J^ =">Lr^.3 *U--J\ 29^1^ ^ ^*lrr^^5 ^^ 
^Iv^l 33^iu_j ^\j\ 32j^\ ^^.^-^ii* -'c^.^y «»JJ\ 31=^0, 16 

„sr-J^ 5X J>JJ\ 33 ^lU-^ _^NJl 32_j^Jl^ 
39^> 38^1 ^l_j^ 

J-i*o\ '^^-r:^'-' ^ Bi Fi Lj«_»i»., Z D p^U-^^ j-o^ e B Aji-e.3i\-o, 

Bi T >>^1^ 5-o-f^-*! Z ^U-^l 5-^^. R l^^Si-l^ La.*^ ' E j-^ji^.^ 

» Z D V. 10: g-«-^^-< 5-il^^ i^v"^* '^^ O*^^ ^^ ^^i (Z Wc 
desinit) 9 D U>U-4«)\ lu B' C R ^y^"^ ^ JS^^ " ^i*' omnes; 

sed rectius ^;S.-i-^ 12 R — Cj'-^> u K L-i^ft u B — \ji^ i^^ R 
^Jj^ "« R >>Jy. n R + o^^. " F' <;j? " T — i^ 

20 R desunt omnia ab ^_)^^ (j* in v. 11 ad yj>j^^ ^J■* in fine v. 12 

21 T — »jj^ 22 Fi »j^ 23 ci T o'r?:^. K ^r^- '^V' " 1^ '■r^-ii 
21 R U^^ 20 A' F' C Bi T O'-*^, R i-<^» 27 D j^^UjJl, R 
iCixijbL)- 23 K Ij-^. '■■>^%5 29 R "^^ i3 3" R L-^, ^_55^ 
31 A' Fi C< Bi T cr?.r?r^. C2 ,;_,.;j,-Jij»J\ cr?. j~^ ^ 3= A' Fi Bi T jXJ\ 
33 AiFi B'T i-wliy 31 R L»^^X>i^ 35 R \^^ U.^ 36A'F'Bi 

\^x«)\_j;oj, R IkX-c^Xjj 37 R ^LoJJj 38 R _ AJJ\ 39 Fi B >^J-> o^ 

20* Normal Text of Group I J [Gen. 1, 19- 28] 

24L^,^U:».lS' 24^L^J1^ Lv-^U^U J,^\)\ 23ji^^, ,)JJI jXiL^ 25 
JS^ -Ol^S- 30j,^^lj ^\i^\y ^l^^\ 29^, 2..^3-J* .iU- 

^\^ yi ;t2L,4^^jaiL c)J.j\ i(j_yoj ^l^m\ <oj\ ,31^^ 27 

42^^.jit -"JjJo. -loU JS^ ^9J»^^H »»Jj^ asL^j^jt;^,^ 
1 legas cum C solo: j/*^; cf. supra v. 11 2 B' blji. B»A«T 

jj^, R JUi, A2 >>Aa. 5S\i c A' \jL^ • R: j;^ *-Xa. ^_,..»jo Js'j 

aj;ji.^l Uu flyjl 8 Ai B' o'-?'J'>>-'l ' A U4r^iw^\^?) 10 R + 

Is'^.UJl 11 A F + f^T^^bj 12 c D LU^ow viOi ,UJl ^\_J5 '3 BR 

^^jL-^ H DC' |j>-«a<J* '* R UssJilj '/-^b '-r^^ " R ,r^^><i^ 

^J\ 1- R - 0^1 18 R ,j-^\ '9 R 'JlyJ^ ejV\ Cj\3> cy 

J^^^^i 2» B c>>3^'5 c^iljs, Bi T ^U^'s f^L"^ 2' J^^ usque 

ad ^^i ileest in D 22 R •^\yb 23 R Jo^a.^ 2-r>^ -' deest in 
F 2b R •^\y(i 26 A' Fi Bi R T ULwJl 27Ri^LL«^ 28A1F1B 

\y^\^^, Bl \^kL-*Xjj 50 R Ji\l>^ jls.\^\ 30 R Jpy^\ Jfj 

3> R <JjJo. 3j R jl^ =3 c' \^^\^. (■' UUK D iui, k'M^\, R 

Lot^iol^ 31 c. D \^j.^^ 35 D L«3jbjl 36 A" Fi i; R U»^ liJLwJ^ 
>' B R ;i>U. 38 J{ (^U,^\ Js'^ 3a R Lj^Lr J.^,M\5 «o B R 

^1 f\y,J\, Bl Uk 41 TB3 ^J}s.-Co. 42 B Ji J=.j^ll J* 

[Gen. 1, 29—2, 9] Part IT, Section IT 21* 

3Ji 2lj^ 2y^ ^£5;r* ^y-^ J^ <U5LX^ j^ U ^1 JU^ 29 

UL*L UJU ^yU £;^. ^^ is\^- ^ J ^5^ Js^ LJ^ J._;M1 
fijj^i eilb J<r^ .U-JI ';>^ Js'} J:';M1 Ji^^5 f-^»^5 3" 
s^UJa s_^s 'M5UI '^..^..ixs Jfj iS^ __y-iJ ^JC^ J=_^\)1 J.S 

^li-^ ^l-w.^ ^\i^ \l=f. ^^^^^ ^A lolJU ^^ U-Xk <OJ\ ^1^5 31 

l^U^j^^J ^'5^^5 Jp)^^i i:l.»^\ OJ^5 1 II 

LV«-^. ^^J' A-JJl tjsjjl ^_^l <)JU.»\ 
C^^\ ^X^ j.y. ^ir CJ J^j'^Jl^ *U.-J\ iiJ^ 20^1;^ I9Ua 4 

Ujls" J=)^J1 .Vii.^ ^^^^i o^* Cf'° ^-^-^" err:* ■^^^;, 6 
is'L^I k.»_«o (^^r^j.* ^3 ^.ij J^")"^^ cr* '^'r^ j^U»^i\l\ J-^=^ <OJIj 7 

25dJU* jAr>.3 ^3^-i^Jl ^S^ 24^>\|\ ^ U^y ^^ iJ^\ J_^\^ 8 

J?U\ ij;^^ jJi-UJ\ il«3.ii ii;s^ J? JpjM\ ^^ i^\ CU^i^ 9 

iLfU ^ ^^yo ^^^' iyji \i^ 5 K ^^Lt, 6 R CJjJ ^XJ\ flyjl 
7 A' Fi B T yii^\ ^.yU-A., R ^.-isLl ,_-.w^ 9 Ai Fi T J-S^, B deest 
9 R deest lo R \>\^ n R J^, u B T Uv^J, R (.-«,^.3 

13 R i^^.JJl ^U*> 5-;^.^ '< R <.4t*-^ '^ R (►Vi^^ '^ R 

<UJ1 viJ^b^ 17 R i-^SJi^ 18 R UjJjiJti-U 10 B IJsAj 20 R 

^i-Mj 21 c J.ii> t---^s 5<^-«^5 in parenthesi 22 A' Fi Di j*j>. 

23 jj^ etc. usque ad Js;Ml j^ deest in D 2* A' F' B' c;>>* <i CrCV*^' (3 

25 A' Fl <^ J6 D _ ^ 

22* Xormal Text of Group 11 [Gen. 2, 10—21] 

^JUa ,^^ cr'i^x^^ cri^-r^ 'c-cr*^' Cr- ^y^- x*^ ^^i 1" 

cU> J^ ■'^^>=>- J=>_;> e-:^?^ ^^**~'* **j -v:;j>-**r:* Ujo^l ^ 11 

*^>^-ijJ\^ <Ov«^J' *r?^ ^^y. ^'---*5 ^*~~^ J=l>"^' ^-^ I— ~*ij 12 
iL^j.1 ^:>j\ j^^s^ ^3=*-'' y»5 0"^=^ i^"-^' ;^»-^i r^'^i 13 

^^>yj> ^ ^\ f=r-^^ t-::^ ''c^ :yili f>\ <iJV\ Oy» ^1^ 16 
f^l j i-!cAJl5 U3.-U 1' JS'li" ^J jliJlj ^.^' ifjj^ i^ ,^5 17 

141j^ V.i^\jy^ l^X- J^lj- ^JJ\ 

jii^^ »^^5 ^yo, ^ujv\ ^\ ^...^. Nj ^^1 c.y\ JIS5 18 

^^ Js^ lejJi^* Jo^5 Ji- ^;.yjl ^^ is^^l C^^\ J^^ 19 
J-'i^i '"^f-^*^* *U.-~J1 21^^ 5-:^^>^5 (^'-<=-r" ^■:^=^ f-^' er***'^ ^0 

I B A' F' ^y>A >B J-s->JI ^^ ^ y.^ili, A ^;^LsX;ww J-v->J' iu mar- 
line 3 B notat J-^jJ* J"^* (3* A sub littera ^ (coptice) is^.^l, F 
id. supra nomen scriptum litteris copticis « A' F' B< j.*a.'^\ (Jj^"^' 

5 A' Fi '>^j-?jJ^ J^'^^i ^ ^^ -^' ^' J"*"^^. ' S -^' f'' *^' ^ J-«*r»^* 
8 C <Vh a:T -Oj <*J_»jtJ in paienthesi, et addit: (^) •ii«=''V.5 ij » •») . — sic 
saepius a A' Fi Ji" J^ y ^y^\^j3 »ys.vU) J^ j^^ '<> B' 

^)^^ (^3) 11 B 4- j-j-v^' 15 kiUls usque ad Lv~* deest in D 

13 Bi 0>^" ^^ '* B ljj>.*^ (sic) 'i I) - <*JV\ 16 Ai Fi y^\ 

n A' j-~>=>»5 " B (iUj 13 D »U-«>1 2u B My»-»«)l 21 C D E 
^y^ 2 J D Ji'^ 23 c ->^y. " I) UJ^ (sic) ■■'s Ai Fi 
D iS)-^\ ^3ic) 

[Gen. 2, 22—3, 9] Part ll, Section II 23* 

3U^-^^\^ i\jA ^M ^^ 2i;>^UJl t^^\ i<)JN\ '^yi iLixil^ 22 

s»l^l ,_j»j.j sjjb ,_5.»i. cr* *^i os-*'^* cr* r'=^ o"^' *'^* f^* J Lai 23 

7^^UjM1 '•c'^.i ^ji^^ij i3-^.5 ''^'^ """j' J^r" "^y^- "^^ 2'*' 

U^l^ \. 


U^ii^ ^\ J'j^)\ Ji^^j ^•rM^=^ cr- ?^=^' ^^^^ ^'j) 1 III 

j "^1 _;sA^^ Cj1_^' s-ci*^ o^ '2Q il^J si^i oJLii 2 

\3yt ^\3y^ kJ"^ "ilj-JJ A-Iil CUJUi 4 

USL^tl Jii-o U3-L. ^;;!ilS'Lj ^J.J1 f_j^l J, ^^1 fr'i^. aJJI c;,^5 5 

ajJoi '^o-rr*^' y=^ 'i-li^ J^UJI *-^*i 'fr?^''^ ^* »^^l Cj1^5 <i 

IGU^JJ^ U=r^ v^Uk*l^ vJ-dS'l^ U=rJy»J" C^^ Cj->-^^ 3^'^-^^ 

i^\ JSli 

^3^5 ^^ J^y 'S^^^Ls U-Cr^l L^is^ n|^«>\)i- U.«3-^»( CUs:^-'U 7 

LftlJ>U 4 D L^^ •■' A in margine scriptum est, posteriore raanu, 

Coptice et Arabice; 0'>^^ -^j-JI ^^ U»->V, P idem Arabice tantum, et 
supra legitur: (J-«=l, C D UsJ-"-? j^^ ^jjL\ uSa ^"^ 6 J) ^^Uyoj 
7 Ai Pi UaUS' 8 A F ^=:^i)i 9 D c>^^.f '" -A-' F' B' Ci E' 

^^^L^^a,^. A2B2C2 j;;\!ls.\i.-u. " ^ ^JJ* 12 p U 13B 0-* ^*» 
i« C UyJljjJu 15 c cxyiJLj D cr:^ 16 El Lv^ " n ^^LxiM\ 
(sic) »8 A' Pi B' D cP^.f " Ai Pi Bi o-^ 2" A' ^_$>^ 

RhodS| Arabic Pentateuch in tbe Church of Egypt. 10 

24* Xormal Text of Group II faeu. 8, 10—22] 

' Ql . « -t, U 

iSA.\ 3\ »\_^\ .^Lii Ua >_uX*i M>UJ isl_;*iJ <J^I Jlii 13 
5.;,-^ j^ 7,jx51 iJ^i^ \J.» culj.3 sM iLIi'-J <OMi JIj^I JUi 14 

9yb» L(gl-*J. liU.^ 0^5 ''^r»-'^ C^-:r.i ^^'-^ ii^l>>-s S^Jji^l^ 15 

^^.jjo o'r-"^^? ^Jjo^'j "^\^\ '1^1 "»r^ il^ JU-^ 16 

J^lj"^ ''.ilUjo j=;Ml cu;-«J U^:^, U^^ jTLi -ii ^1 '3aj_^l 

jii\ ^..^.Jj^ J^li^ JiJ ^^^Iv^. >il^-i)3 «iU^ 18 

OJ^l e.^1 J*^^* J» >jy*i" J^ '^'^^^^ 3;^ ^y^ J>S\3^ 19 

*Lo^\JI 5.;^.,^ \\ UJm iM^ dO'yi ^\ ^i\ U>5 20 
i'U.43-.*^l5 >^^ ^^ J-;^*/*- ''^^ij'^ f^'^ ^^^ <^j^^ 5-^-«5 21 

201^^ jibj iUii iysAJ* J,l »jo. j:^. ^^M\ ,*Lai 

• A' Fi B C D E CU-^iX^li 2 A' F' B' U^^ ^^^-^^^^ ' A' Fi 
j^jjix C-jLaa. 4 A' Fi B ,_,^!^^1 * A' F' B' ^ o A< 'aa CUJLsJ M 
r^'-W* J^ cr" "-^' ii^JLU crtOjSj ^U 7 I) ^\ (sic) 

8 A» Fi B' 5-;^l^ ' D E y* 10 A> F' B' (^) ^-^ " A' Fi : 

j[xS\ ^lJI^;r^\ 3>^M 12 A BFi cr^--rJ> " A' F' 'i^^^^^l " E 
liLU-sJ 1; A' Fi B (^3) '^^J^$ '« D ^5i>. I' A' Fi B' L^jb[..^^ 
18 Ai Fi B' ^^^ '■> A' Fi B' (Jju., B^ ^4^_ 20 A B — U^ 

[Gen. 3,23—4, llj Part II, Section II 25* 

^1 J'^VI ^ J-.J.J f^^\ ^y^ cj- ^'^^ ^y ''»'=^r^'5 23 

i_j>^.^ i-jL/t^ 2 ^^^.Li i_Jj«.ij.» «_oi^\ -o^i_i <>.JLo» j2_,^_»*)^ fil rr^i •^^ 

iuJ^ jys-^ J^.y. ki^E^J 3jU 
CUsjj C-JL»^ i^plS 0^55 vJ-J^s* s^l^l -11^ f.>\ ^^5 1 IV 

ijjyj Ub^ ® J';)'^' »7*^' cy cP*^ s-V f^'' "^^ o^ ^^ ^ 


•■'L^j.J.t (J^-*-* '-^'j *^^-:A* c>y^- '-^^^J^ ^ 

'6^3 l^Lo Oi '5JiJ.i J\ (.^-^"-^J <»^> J^U^ Cp^" J^' P 8 
(OOii 183^^\ J^U ^ Jj,'^ fU '■ Jiil 

( j) + v:UiXy-«, C D + ^ioCUiJo. ^_$JJ\ iiUi (D ^--viJo,!!), Ci + ^( ^iUj 
(---.1-ICo 4 D E ^jp- '' Ai Fi B Aa.j) 6 A Fi B' J-*-"-?., D 

O^ (sic) 7 Bi Jsj'iH c3 8 E f/J( 9 Ai Fi Bi yi>i, A2 F2 B' 
^ <UJ\ J--JI5 10 Ci i-^\f " D ,ji^ (sic) 1' Ai Fi Bi 

^\ viUT ^^, viJ^s-vi i1j'J»=>-' ->-" (J 0^5 '^'"^ «-^ wU>*>a.\ ^;;\ 
(Bi 4- viLJl) A*^j, A2 F2 B2 l-»-^.li ^y^^ (J 0^5 '^*-*^ lJ-^• '-^^-->-**»^* 

U>L^" "iUJlj ^iU i^\j ixkiU cu^3^\ 13 E — (iUXkiL n Bi Ai 
^\ 15 Ai Fi Bi }^\ 16 Ai (J\ n A' Bi iiU.^* (?, *U>^1) 

18 E -- i^\ 19 B E *i^;=>-l "> Fi ^j^* 21 D \^j\, Bi Fi 

,_^\ ki3=\j (Fi — Lil^) U\ CUi/^ Jjb 22 B o"^*^ " B' 0'>^* 


26* Koi-mal Text of Group H [Gen. 4,12—24] 

iij4,.uu ^^i u^y vi^J^- ^\ iy^ M^ 3>;^\ ^ J.^. 12 

J Jsijyo- J ^^.^ ^}^ ^ ^^j' v^yj cP^' J"^ 13 

■^U-i\ i*.^ ^\ji J-^ ^^ Js eUJ-J ,_^ dJ Jjyi JLis 15 
^OoJo. ^1 ^\ si^NJU ^'JJ J*=^ iS'i\ Cjji\i s^UJ ^>i» or* 

^^ 'il\^ io.>y Jp,\ J ^J:^-^ <UJ1 .(^5 ^^j. ^JilS j^^^ 16 

l-^^>oL\ ^>^l ^r-^b >-*-^* 

U*i 25 Jby C-^lj «Jo.>^>5 cr''^»=^ 26UiLo 'iJ>^\j> b\^ ^jl^^ 22 

i6.iL«"i) *UJ b 20^-^,^ U.^^1 ^5 \JU b 2;^-\^._j cU"^ J 1*5 23 

,_^X»kXj UUi^ 2»^_^j^ ^^ CUUS ^1 ,_^^liJ U^\ 

1 A' Fi Bi Uis 1 Ai F' Bi ^*J 3 D A-»<^ < A' B ^i^ 
5D — f>^\ 6 B" C-w^^ ' B jU-«»\ (sic) 8CDE<»JLo. 

9 Ai Fi 'i^\ '0 A F >y 11 A' Fi Bi (J) Jiy\ u F> J'^\f 
n A' E' M^ F2 ^1* D ^Ij^ i< Ai Fi Ji\^iv-« D J.-o.Uv* 

15 A' Fi jvoV 16 ABCF C'U'^ " D UAj.a.\ is D \5^^\^ (sic) 
19 E J(y. JO Ai Fi J5> 21 t'D JLsy. " A' Fi C;.Xa.\ 

2' CDE yt\j^\ " ACF Cj'jLLJJ\ 25 c Jby D Jb^. 

26 CD I^.Lo " D A^l— UJ A' Fi Bi <)^"i^V '8 B ^V** 

2» A' Fl ,_yXj -«ai 30 D OJ^ " -A-l F' Oy>JL.-ttfj i-»^^ 

[Gen. 4, 25—5, 14] Part TT, Section IT 27* 

^\i .JJOs ^JJl J-oU 4Jj,^ 3U.^^ J ^ui ,jJJl £,1 dJiiU 

^xJjl^ i-lxj *.!)Lo g^^ Hj^Li <3jJ^l ^1 j^ju fi\ ^LTI I'-vJUilS'^ 4 
^^\ i'j.J«U ^-_y^X.4A) ^__y..._^iL» ^2_y.;J.iLo iG^Li;, is^U^ (i 

rj-;^-i-**J J^*"***? <^Uo ^>v^fcO ^^V' *^5' ^^;' vXjO j^^ ^^i^L^ l^^S'^ t 

^V3b*.>J> AJ^ltt ^wL*^ ^^w%,3»-**Ott ^^oL« lT^^' lJ^ i ^ 
^_jl^ ft j^>s-0 vXJala ^.^vaO 

(-^vJ«Jj\^ 22X!>U f,;-^ J.-vSUi,;rXl J.J^I ^\ -'^^JO j^jb^ Lr''^5 -'^^ 

t._jLOa ^^y>*.0 cXJ^fft ^>^.<aJ 

Obcj '"'crr:'^ '"''*r^*5 '*^'-^ "^f-^^J ^;^bL*9 ^iTl '■'f-^.^=>. Ools'^ 14 

I D E .^t^ 2 C D '■^^'^ E ^i-^ij » A2 F2 ^T ^UJ 

< A' Fi Bi ^^^ biy 5 D l^w)o. (sic) ' D *Jl^)^ A" F" cr?-^^' 
A2 F2 ii^-ur A3 F3 JK. 7 B U:^3 D <OJ\ U-i\^ » A F D Jil» UJj 
9 B D E F jJj 10 C D \^} 1 1 oinnes >-i-^, sed vide vv. 4, 6, 7 
12 Ai F' Bi f>\ J^'^i " D >x)5 u c E '^^P '5 omnes ^U UU^ 
leCDEJx^ nBCDEFJJ^l is D CU^ 19 d — j^^*^ 
20 D j-^ j_yo'l 21 B o-r*-*^ " B *-^ (sic semijer) 23 A F t' E 

^_y^^^,^^ 24 D ^.JXft 25 D _ ^^i 20 B E D l.*M_»ii.^ 27 F 

^J.^U.<3^ et "i) supraserijjtum, igitur (J.-^'ilU^^^xi, sio fere semper 2S ]) 

28* Normal Text of Group II [Gen. 5, 15—81] 

^jU JLU- iiU C^L^" -^^^-Ijw jJ^l ^;>> Jot? j;,.^ >;b ^^Is^ 19 

•> L^ .. ■ > > 

l^iLt^) ^y^ d>-^..i>.0 ^j_,.;J^.>.0« ■ - Lx^..^.) . 11<>.^L« Jj^yi^ ij^^i 25 

i5^.>JU*j, iSU '^ -Uj ^iL«V jJ«l ^1 '3j^ JJ:^^ ^U^ 26 

j>jM\ ^^. UJU*! ^^ '-"b:^7^. 'J-* ^^ '^^y -W-)* (_,i-_5 29 
22 u,,^^ 2ijbl ■; li'U-y jJ^l ^1 joo ^;_j^ dUV ^It^ 30 

^_jLO* jj!-"^^ «>-*'8. ^w«..vO ^wsJs.««>Ja 

j^^-Ji-iST * D j:y* » D j^r^* "^ ^ i^^' D iiU-Lj." : d 
,_y3 (sic) 8 D ^.r-*^^ 9 B D ,_^'-< '« A' Fi Bi <>^^ A' J!i 
LXa. i.jtij n A' Fi Bi ^i-i-.) j;^-oUJ'j <)oi.<..u) iiU 12 D J-;-**'? 

n B C D vXJij ^w« H B ^;^■ D AiU.;^' A' F' B' crrr^^ '^^ ^■^^ 

" C E oUj^ D <^iUj"^ Fi numeiis copticis: 18:^ " E •^}) A F 

Jca.^^ (sic) '9 D j.y JO A' U^H^^. A' bojjo. Ji D A .... ■; . A 

uumeris copticis: ")95 '2 D AJ^ a5I , « . ..i A' Bi numeris copticis: 
776, 770, 777 '< E ^ ^ .^.'--..ij I . > . < -^ ^ 

[Gen. 5, 32—6, 13] Part II, Section II 29* 

JUib« f'-:*-^ f^ CJ"^ *JUV jJ»U i^-L^ <>J!'..,— .^^^i- j_i ^^IS' »-^5 32 

j_j-.ixi CJ ^> ^XjO ^;^5 ^^y\ JJ-J ^ J'^'^' ti-' V^ V'^^b 4 
Hj.r:^l -Ji- ^1, J=._j\J J.S. y.^\ Ol^^i-o i^-J^J^l V'r'^y^ ^5 S 

^"ill v_IjJ\ (.Lol c*..»jo ^li-j ^^•'"j 8 

22^_^_^1^ 'ilyas |3NUlr ^Oljb LiL^I ^y ^IS ^y '''JU-tl Ua^ 9 

^-^ j> J^ o>3 ^^-^ ^^ ^.;'J' ''o> ^J'-*' vLyi >ji 12 

I D \^J^\ ^UJ\ lylS'^ 2 D ^^^ ^ oJ^lj 3 Fi i^) LJJ^ 

^^LwS. «.(^\ 15*^^ '.JIjL-b rfJJI _^-0 j^ A' *)<ljlJ\ i_2;Lo ^_^\ -Co^ll^^ ^j 

C1A2 *iJ\ *Lo\ A3 f-^*^)\ >-o 151 ,^\ )\j^\ * B £)( J,i D (_i\ 

Ai B' P' C D ^\-^\ Cji-^ CJ"-^ (J* 5 I) — UL-^iw 6 B JUi 

'BCD ^:;,i->o 8 A ^M^La 9 A' Fi Bi j^^-^l j.-*^ lo D ^^^y^j 
11 Ai Fi B' ^LUl 12 B U E j^'^Jyt '^ Ai F' B' ,;jryir<'-^'^ A^ 

*byl\ C -\- j^^y^^b D 4- j^^U-^ob u 1) \j^^ is Bi ^j Fi 

g^«» M oJJl i_-s.-ii^ B' F2 .iiLiiL J, *JJ1 _SL«i 16 B' Fi Si^ 

n B> Fi v-aJJI is D + (jl^ f^Ur^' " sic onines; B' A.;-^ 

20 A' bo>-va 21 B Ai Fi "i^^a. Bi Ay-'ot. 22 Ai Fi Bi ^ ^-^y* 

2» Ai Fi Bi 0'->-^ 2) B E J,\ 25 Bi ^^) 28 Ai F' Bi ^►^♦JJi 

B2 ^_^jS.\S 

30* Normal Text of Group 11 [Gen. 6,14—22, 18,1—4] 

2CLUJ1 z-^\^ '^r*-?. '"^ ^--i-^ cy ^y ^^^ ^^' ^ f-^^ 14 

^b J^^U A^l^i J* Jjy C^ *<>^; CLX4 2,iUiJ\ J^l^ 16 
UJli' LsU,^ LJLi- eisUl, j^i^ ''<»^-r^«- ^3 ^cUiJl 

liUJ^ J*i ^^t JLJI .jo »^\ U J<r y '■- J-»-" 22 
^b Js. ^L».yb^ ^^,^ Ly^ j^ .^ <)JJ\ 'sjily, 1 XVIII 

^\j Oi "><)oL< ""'Is^ '-^''-rJ' (J'-=»-j *-iJ^' '^j-ojU ^^^.-L^ J»^» 2 
Ja^Vl ^J^ -^-^^J <>0^^>^ v_jb ,^^ l'^o,=> £,^\ 

' Bi A' Fi ^^-^\ BJ A»r';U:.-,--iJI (in margine) y.l>^\ u^--i^ 
^j^y-^. "SI ^iJl » A' Fi B' CJjve'^* ^ C t*-«aJ' « A" F' Bi 

U\y> »Ut\ ^»» O^-i ■■ '^ <'^'.=^ " A' LiXu) F' >— ».»'-«^ 

7 A' Fi Bi J^.^V « Ai Fi B' (^i\} A2 F^ \V- C^l^ » A' F' B' 

*4sJv>o A' F2 f.(^Sj>-> 10 A« F' B' cUJl i-ij u B' ^ Sm 

■'■^ Ai F' B' j-^-«=5 •' T bl_;-J5 " T *^"t-«^ 'i T IM^ le T 
»^-vj u A» F' Syaivi A2 F» <*—!_; ^ T (^UJJ 18 C" Fi T O^ b 
19 T ^iULc\ A_»ju 0->^» ^-:^— ^ o^ -" '■' -"^ J-S^ " T (J^^l 

22 T \^3:^J.yU.j\ 2,1 X — Sjob 

[Gen. 18, 5—14] Part 11, Section It 31* 

^j\ »XL* Ij^s 'M ^ya^ SS> ^jo |^„<5 ^y^LXi Ij-^ 'J-i-l^ 5 
CJJi •'US' 'IJ-S.* Jj«i> 2J|.ii ^j,^ 

ll<J^^l.AJ l"^*s>^ 9L;_v^ SLo^^ Nls* J>-:L1^ !iyo Jl '^^-^ia.!^ 7 

*U^^ J^b 15^ U> JUi yb Lil eUi^^^j ii^Uo ^.\ n^ Jlsj 9 
is^UJ^ JjlS ^^ '"c;'-'>J> !>>•* J-^ (3 ^1 S^b 1^' isjLti 10 

fkiilj U^^^b'l J, U*i,5 U.Li 22^ 21^1^ »V,Lwj 20^,^yij 11 

2ni:;-^ 24^Lo Xi 
2e^yl ^ils U^- ^ C^s.-^ 25is^L^ 1>LJ <i,-^l^^J C^yi JUi 13 

2',^=:;--' ^U> J.3 LJI^ 2c^ii.^|j jjT 
2H\bli- ^1 jr^_^\ oL«^l U* 2S|3 spi ^^ ^\^s <OJI J.-U J* 14 


.*J y Lai 3 T — lii^* 1 T ^' Ui' ■■ C fU^l (sic semper) 

6 T ,j-"i^3 ' Ai Fi B' C T ^^r^'3 8 H' T '-rv*-^ ' T Ua=L) 

10 T sLXslj 11 Bi ULai l^fji-UxJ <*ol.»jLiJ C VyL< »^J<J-^ <)oU-)LiJ, 
Cl ib^U loco '^_j^Ui T LoLai> i.jtJ.,a^ 12 T >-*-955 (if^-r^L«\ f4^>^^ 

isysxiJI iXXiyb 13 Ai F' Bi (►4,--^ l;jL> B^ (►V^ ''>-^*-? A- |j^43-<\3ii 
A'' f4:ri_JJ!_ 1 jJ. (?) 14 T ^U».li kilo\-^\ ii'^Uo ^_ji,. ^^j\ CIjJI ^ 

NLfls i5T-)-i(^Uo i6T+<»J I7A1 Fi UjU j^^\ BI JjlXJI j^^l 
T i(;U^ C^yS>.3 J-^-i^ ?^1 (3 ^::-3yi '8 T l-o\ 19 T Jii-b ^^ 
^^iJ^ i^j^ '—jy^-^i^ i_j^ 2u T f-c^^T^' o^i ^' B C F — tils' 

22 T — J^9 23 T + ^i-«J '4 T -lio 25 I' ^^^.^ ij ii^,Lui >J:,J^2=1-^ 

26 T s>S\ ^II Lia. ^yl 27 Ai Fi Bi ^)}^'- '^^ A' F' Bi £=~lj til 

J..JLJI fljj\ ^^ >JU9yi (Bi IJjb (3) \J^ y^^\ 29 T O^J\ ja-jLw 

32» Normal Text of Group II [Gen. 18, 15—27] 

^ laJi-L^ r*='^*-* v'-r^V' *(j-'^5 

lykis-?. ^\ ij.3Li ^^ <JvX^ J^'5 'Sr^ cj^J'-r^**' '*^' ^cx«-l.* ^M 19 
(^^j^^ V-y* 5-^- "'<-^ c^'j J>J^Li inyul^j Cj^I j^ 

^\ \s.*, jjLii' ^\ uj^ j=._;M\ ^i;> b dJLJii^ ^'-»-'> j-^ 7^ ' 

(^\ U-^ N ,.( J_^ ^ J-a ^\ ^-^X u A' Bi \yJ»^} lyj«i Ja 

0^\ fU\ UilS 17 T fJki;i 19 C <.-rr*^^l liic et deinceps; ct'r. 

V. 6 19 T + (Jj/J ;o B T ^ilM^. 

Gen. 18,28—33; 50, 1—8] Part II, Sestion TI 33"* 

■^ J'j^ C^^ ^^-^ ->^=^5 o'^ A^' J-*^ v.^-^^ ^. Jl-" 30 

J Lis is^,^:^ 14,..^ ^=^^ c^l^ o*^ *r«-" *^* r^"^ J-^ ^JL" 32 
(J,' (>-^*ljjl ''?^^5 f-^*^'^^ ^ <>^US' ^^ ^ji LJiJ ij^y t_y^^5 33 

AJ-0« <*.-J.6 ''j_jib» (J-^il <^2>.^ ,_^ Ol-cO^ i^Si ^ ^ 

J^l^-t^l s^ClNJl kls^!ib\ l^ils:?. ^^1 ^;_,.^_kls^-'* »^'>-<^r» '-j^y. ^*3 2 
'0^5 «Cr-kIs.-^J* fb"l J.»io ajj^ 3\J U_^. CJ^^^I <^ ^^5 3 

L«0 ^i^y^'.Jt^^^ y^a^ ^^^ <^-J>£ 

>y\_5 ^1 ^>NJ J.*-ol 2l^\Jlj ^M 20JUa ^jjlA-li ''•'J'jW 
jlJL^^Uxa ^^' *S ^.*.>^ ^v^^rw ^SL^ ^A'O^ sol ^SvX>J c-fi-w y_ vXA^aS / 

5>t«.jj.^ .^..-ol CX-o ^.^^.^^^ AJ^Ll^ L_Lcoy '-^-^ '-■'ij^^ J^3 8 

1 B + j^j^jijjVl^ ' B + ;_$J^ W. ^ Bi ^to5 4 G iSbj D 
ilSoj s B' j^^k-is\^l cE j-^s.vXj\ (in margiiie) 'A' -l^'?} 
-«M d^is s G ^;J,Jl-^ 5 D G — v-IuAiJ UJi 10 T CU-iiiS\ 
'1 D G pJ^J^ '2 T ^.^3 ^ C--i^ ^;>1 ^Is n D ^ '< T 

^S^L<i\ <5 D G T Ij^'-iXs 16 T CJ^yJ >1 " Ai F' B' ;3s. ^sl 
18 T iiJ-^iJ^ (3 ^Ij 13 D E G T Jpj\ (3 20 T ^b;j> ,^.>\ 

21 T + (M 22 T + ^_5j1 23 T f-*j*-'-> '^< T — JJ»\ 25 T ^^^l/i 
2G T 27 D E G J>;\ (3 

34* Xormal Text of Group JI [Gen. 50,9—19] 

^b\ i-jLy.^ UjU <iy^M 5-^-^5 "IJv.ii. ''(jVi U-;Ja» 
9»J>J» \^Ui 8>lil ^,>..^< ia^LLjl ^UUS' J:.j\ ^l£w ^\;j 11 

^^IJLJI oUi ^,^\ ^_^> oUJJ. ^^^j-.a^\ ioiL».J»6 <)La.Lu 

(^Lo^ Ui" »^ '3>yj»s^ 12 
ii'KLc c-^^l^l »\yJ^\ ^JJl '-'J-ci*^! '^7^' (i '■'''r^>5 13 

<kj>^ l»,>>ji-»a j^.JJl f.-^.,.;*.^ <>JJji.\^ ^* r*^^ ci' '—*-"'>?. "?^J5 1"^ 

d^l ^> JvJL^ -"^»-< <*^( 0^>^ 

2'JIS^ .iJli^ J^- LUiar^^ libl ^\ lyU, <J^y>, J\ 261jls? 16 

:'0j:-iJl5 (».<3Xlk^5 (^Lo\ 21.,^ ^1 i_i^^^ \y^- 2S^j^ 17 
^\ »2j,.^^ aij/Loi ^ ^\^ j^li ^•^\^ ^ g^jii ^jji 

ijijt* ji_(3^Mi' sjjv,;* <— *-^y. ^^1^^ '^'-^' 
LSI aIi Lil ^M lyl^' NJ i_i-.)y. (^ JUi 19 

(sic) 8 A E F G >U>1 T i^\ B iUil a T — »Jj«i lo T IJjb -^h^^ 
^_y»i 1J^5 O^j"^* X^ (3 >3->Jl l-^J" y* c^y^"^ •— ■^^^ " A' Bi 
^^ 12 T ,jXJ\ sj-a 13 T (iJbUay U/ IJ^i.* iy^> <0 a-^-oj 

u B iyXi>^ o*-*-^^ >>^)' ti^ »vL»^» 1.' T j^l (-ieUsuJl lo T 

D cr^'^* " T 5^; r^ ^" '^ '^-^ =' T ^>j UJ 22 T lyl^ 
\^ Uj 23 T ^5 T->iJ ' Cr* Ui_j6 (■t'K-^J b LU jt^_ 2« B l;^l5b 

25 B T + <>^ 26 D G ^fLs^i 2T T ^U 29 B, T \JSjt ^\ 

D E G >iU J^ 29 T + CUil 30 T ^;^'^J 1^ U^^io viU I^ji-Ud ^^'^ 

31 T ^ j^l) istw\ 32 Bl T >iUj\ <JJl Jj».\ ^^ viJjs.-^ 3> D G 

GUi 31 T <*o^^U.\j \ylf >\ 35 1) (i y La-j 30 T liU l^jvXaJo 

[Gen. 50, 20—26] Part IT, Section II 35* 

^^\j> J ij^Jx^JI Jju:>. ,OJI^ "y^k ^ 2^^^l^Xi j,Jol lU^l, 20 

■il^is- U.^ ^ ''Oyo. ^_^ ,_^1 IJob ^_^ 
scuIUil^ (►aIJsj '^"^^^ '■■(^^> 5^^ >^l^ V ^ JU^ 21 

^b^ "^1 ._iJ^\ ^XJI Jp^^Jl J,l J=jNJ\ »ij6 ^^ <^.>.*^.5 

S-jy^.5 J^^'i rr?*'^' 

Sjiji^^ 23^^U;,-c' Cffr^'**' 'V'^i '*"'^'^ "'i3 >*5 '— ''-^>?. O^t^ 26 

j^'^l fyJ\ J,l ^^j-o^l 2 A' F' Bi (J, J^ .UJlj p^^ J, ^,-X.».«J6 

j-vs?Jb 3 Ai Fi Bi JyiJ. < D G \j^ s i) (; bl^ o T f^yl 
^ T> G f^yj^ 8 B' T f-«3-?y^" J* <J^^ » D Ji'^ '° G ij'^} 
11 T fl^t ,_5-o i2D^-^t.l i3BDGTi>>l iiT^3J.^ivi^ 

{i.yi.r>. y_^\) 15 T O^'-^ (^jJl ^^" <*^"y>-l i_Lw^. I vkli.^ 16 D + 

My n T + Ua-^ 's T l^i-^i^U \>[jiSi\ dJJl 19 D — j^^-* 

20 E l-ot D G U«^ 21 T j^\ 22 G !Sj^*5 23 T ^1) kisvi 


JUj^ <*JJ> ^ljj2 j-^* ^=?-3 ij* f^5 iy=r^*-**'• k'^^U J=)Ml vJUJlS^ 2 

;y ^Ki ;y ^^^ ^\ JLii 3 

fUkJl ^^^5 ^^\ j;_y-0 <0JI J-^5 Jvl^ )yJ\ 3' ''^^^ r'^-** 4 

fU ^^ *L-o U^U ^^.^5 iUJI k^^ j_j LLvO j^XJ <O.Jl ijlits 6 

jj^ ^i ^\ ,)JJ\ 

j^^j Xi^\ ^^ 3j-«J' iU— J\ JsU*^ (3 _jlji\ ^;;,^-XJ <*AJl Jljij 1-4 
j^ L«lj\^ Ijli^l^ OL?.' *C>^} tJ^^ 

\j\y\ ^ ^^.^ 15 


[Gen. 1,16— 31] Part II, Section lit 37* 

^i\^\^ j^\ 1^^ kiLja) yLoV> ^1^ 

LaoK L<»j. _L*./o cj^i iL*.^ o'^i 1'' 

.-^ki -Uj. *Jo>. ^^*^ 5^ ^'-«*' s'-r*-'* cr* 5-*^ *-*^' (JL" -" 

. i.\..f^\ J>U»o iUUs JjjNl ^ 

L,^^^ f^Ur? U^l-^"^ i^ L»)y>-j J=;'^l rr^'' ''^^ J*"" -■* 

,.^^> 3'^ U=iL;-oM ^l^Jl^ *iLLoV J=_)M1 ,_A^^ ''-^l 5^^ 25 

kil.»^ ,_^ ^jX*vo U^,.-^^ Loj_j.«aj LJUvJI 2-L/a<Ui ^l ijlj^ 2t) 
L_-^jJ\ ^Lo^ Jf,ji\ gti^^j r'Ur^ll^ *U-*Jl _;<J>5 ^sr^J\ 

l^^jXla- ,_j-iJ\^ \-Si JJiXal. (>-^^l *3?^ '*-'jy^ f*' "^^ (3^^ 27 

31^5 =Jp)')\ ^l^^l^ Ij^'l ^OJI Uvl J^5 *JJ' U4=-^ >iJ;lj5 28 

^y^\ j^Uo^ iUf-vv^Jl .>jj^ T*^^ iii.^>-*) ^fr \_jJjXtoU L*yU^\. 

ij=y"^^ ij-* >^-> L* jiL*.)^ £U--*J\ ^j^ 5-r;-»-=^5 J*^"^' iy'*-^3 ^-^T^i '^" 

— L— o ^;^6j .eL.^^ 0°3 ''^-^' >^-^^ A.J«X.o Ix ^<^.«.::>. ^\ ^JJ I (»-)^* 31 

V J* 2 V u^Lu.N 3 V j:.;^! \y;:e5 l^j-iS'l^ 

38* Text of MS. Vatic. Libr. At: 2 (S) [Gen. 2, 1—18] 

f^' l3 J^^ ^>wJl-U3 ^JJl (Jjuji. JjL-J\ fyj\ ^ dsJJ\ J-^5 '2 

<)JJI j-L^ -f^. -^ UiXsL i\ >>y^'i xU-^l ij^^ly ^ iijb 4 
^L^l V5 J=y\)l J* «ONJl ^\ J^. f 0..^>. ^1 J^ ^y^\ 

dJtXa. ^JJ\ f>l ^U* yl^^ la^ ^^,>j ^j UU^ aJM\ <0J\ ^y^ 8 
UJi^U u-^It^ U^,k^ cr^=^ V?^ 3 *-«^"^' ^-0 ^Vl ,OJl CXJU 9 
-.liJU r:^' <>>j_s»-c s.s:*^» ^lyLil U..« ^j *v;i^^ *T?^* 

j^\ »;'^. _>JyJI p J-;^ J»,M1 aJu ._^>^ 12 

d.Ju^\ j,j\ 5.;:*^ ^^^' y^5 cJ^^^^ ^'^^ ^Li^M (.^Ij 13 

^4^lj J-*'^' ^L^r^ ^ij_;^>— J* yo^ *-^-^ CU)LiJ\ y^l i;,^!^ 14 

OIt*-!' y* t?V 
k,l^«s-<^j U,.=^-^ C>^ c>'-^ i V*5 f^* <JJ^\ ^\ Js^li 15 
^^^^ JJLxiJ ^U4\ ys^ 5.;^.^ ^;^ ^.IS ^>\ .jJMI <0J\ _^\j 16 

• ' (legendum: J^^y^o^^^a.') V ^J^^y.^ ' V ^y. ' (legendum: 

[Gen. 2, 19—25; 3, 1—9] Part II, Section III 39* 

iU-J> ^5 xl^ar^J* ^p.i-_5 5^:>. i^^NJl ^^ <»JM1 <OJ\ ^:i^ 19 

^_^a.^ f.-.,.!;.^ j:L,_i*Jl »-vL« aiUn-Jl ' J,^sr? *L».^1 ^>\ ,__y»*oli 20 
>>.^^ ^ftU-ol ^-f^ jij^a.!^ i-i-ls ^l-ii fi\ ^ IjUx«j (i.J'i)! <*JJ1 fi'^ts iil 

yM (J\ L<^ j_yU isM^l pM ^^ J.r;.l ^\ fX-^Jl ^Ml cOJl ^^ 22 

^^L>^" U..;^^ iilj-»^ j^UjiXII J lis 4 

j;\^ _^k;HJJ il^ri JSLJl iLJj, is'^sA^' ^1 ii'l^^l Oi^ L:Ui 6 
UyijLj CUiitl^ OJ^li Uj-Ji' (^-c CjJ^^I iliojUJ !sl^»X* 'iyS^^'^ 

^Uil ^sr* ^^ U-i <)^W» <*JJ\ loj^ c^ -^^^^5)5 f^* 

1 V 5^^-»3c0 2 V (►iift <^\ 3 V \J>JiJ^ 4 sic; V J-S'Li 

10 v *JUs 

Bhodb, Arabic Fentateacii in the Cliurc)i of Egypt * 11 

40* T,j-t of MS. Vatir. Libr. Ar. 3 (S) [Gen. 3, Ui— 24 ; 4, 1] 

2^U*iJi 'i\y^\ .::J'-ii 'c:-jo^ \i'-. ii^ dJMi aJJ\ Jls 13 
js'J b\y, ai^ ^^.x^ j^5 3i^3^\ j^^ j_^^ f^UrrJ* 

yb '-<j)-»J ,^~^^ CU-«.J cJ-~?? i^T-vJ' Cr^i '^'^? ''i'»>>i J"*^^*^ 1'"' 

>"^^M\ ^:,^.JJ3■ ^L:..»j. >iu.»^. viui-i.-* ^^^M 'i^j^ J ^5 16 

.iCU4^ ^>Jl ij^-^^ ^ .S^Jili viU^^j Jy .lUJoJi il J'Ji ,>^^ 17 
^^J^r^ JStJ" iLv^ ^^^-^---^ ixJ\)\ ii»jiJ^ 'jjgj^ JSb" M ^IS 

^\ ix>Ml Jl ^^; -^-^ J\ ,ULJ1 JSli 6^,^;,^ J^^- 19 
J^ 3 ;\ exits UjSl *1^ 3J^.j;, ,M ,_^5 20 

U^y^vwJl^ jj^ >— >'-^ '*^-^5)^ r^^ "^"^^ *^* 5-^-^5 21 
^\ AJjj«-« ^3 *<i^>L« j^j^l^S' jLo j-j" y» \iyb <OM( <JJJI JlS^ 22 

Uij\ is'Uii *r^ »^~* ->^^.» *-^. '>-*^. ^ ^j^. c>^^; x"^^: 
U^x. J^l ,_yXj\ L,>)i\ JlLJ ^j«i ^U=j. ^;,.x <OM\ ^1 »i^ 23 
iL^l *'■?**' L^?."^ \»iis.i<:'^ "'»_,Jjui<o '"i^i-ww 

CJUs ^IS CJJJ55 CJ>*3:* ''^^Jij ^'i^ "v-S;* "f>'5 1 n' 

I V (.lUXjii 2 V *^> u-IJUibI » sic; V 6\^ii-oJ\ * sic; 

V »yj>* ' V — iLss—ojSj « V liCsJI 7 V — ^;r;^a- ' sic; 

V 1^ « V j_^r^ i»^-Xw\ 10 V i_-CLiC;-« ^J^-~^ " V fj\ >-»j*5 

[Gen. 4, 2— 20J Part U, Section III 41* 

^U o-^lj'5 c-^ ,_^>j Jjl-* c^*^ J^*^ "^^^^ 0->J>i 0.>_5lji p' :^ 
<JJJ *J^V? i^^'^J' ^' cr* OJ-^'^ LX** ?^'' ■^'^ \J>^ '-"^ 3 

>jl^ J^Lk=L ^UJJ^ 'cr--=-^- (1 C>S ^==-'^ 'cr-^-- o' ^-'^ ^ 


(*.-Ji* kLtvJo vJUiU isiLo viX^la 

JjLa Jl ^li fli- ..1^=^-" j Likf UJls »U.I JjU ^^ilS J^li- p 8 

f> CjJ^^s tali CUs^ ^1 *^;>\il ^.^ .JUil ^^*i^ ^Ml^ 11 

^3 0>5o lj6L>^ L»6L>^ Ijtlyi eX^Juo i^LaJ' Us ixi>^)l JJ.!> ^2_jli 12 

yiJ^, ^\ ^ ^\ ^3 il\ J:>\i JIS 13 
(_y^^^. (jj^^ii C^ ^ O^i cPp^ J. '->-^'-' "^Li ^^1^ 

0>^ C^J'^ V J'^W ?^^ *^' ?''^* C--^ C?^^ 2/^5 1*' 

Ujki ^iJjiX-* i^j-^ *J r?'^ Cj^^J^? cui-».s* «^j^i.«j ^^^lJ 59 U^ 1 7 

J-^lii^i« o-J^I J^Us^^ J-t^"-;;*^ '''>-J3> ^^^ ji;^i -^5 P 1*^ 

2 V ^JL)i U\ 3 sic; V jX^\ i V JUJJ 


42* Te.rt of MS. Vatic. Libr. Ar. 3 (S) [Qen. 4, 21—26; 5, 1—10] 

_jLi>JJ\^ ^^>JJ»J> J-»a. j^ Jp ^» J'j^. <*-:^* (•—''^ ^1 

jo.jJ.\^ tr''^^* A.j>-.;-o I f-'j^ J-*-s-«> cy-''-i^y CjjJj i-^.l ^5 i!:i 

C-JIS. l-L<-io <»>.«-»j1 »IU6>^ Lo\ OjJ^ "^-^^^ '-^.' f*' ^C*^55 2"' 

■j^ls^ Alxs >1 '"'Jj.'-* J>v _r^' '^■'^ "^^^ i_r^}; ^* ''^^ 
x.^jjo\ JoS.^,.->, J^y( <i^^,^l s^^ ^\ ^j toil o---uJ^ 


,UJ\ ^,^b iiUjJb 

i^Lu« i;»-^^ i>J«l« ^ow> ix^ jjL»j UC»^ i>J»l be Aju ,>\ i_r^^5 'i 
li' <>wL»j jj_j.-^iXJ'^ <>^<L.j <>.i-e ».v«J L<j-^b ,__yXJl (•>' fb'l g...«s> C>^i ^ 


>2^yl i-ijJ^b err^ "^r— ^5 ^^ --^r^ ^-^^ 6 
(>J^l3 ^^>^>L*o ft^A^a ^Xro /^i-flJ ij^y' ^Xj*i '•'* vX»-> C^^--.-^ ^ob» < 

Zj <^J.-^ i -.CC^ i_5^^3 '*-'^ <*J^ ^.u^ CZ.-v,<^ f b \ s.^_«.d> ^r~>K» 8 

1 V g*«-TO 2 V <^;;^\^ :i sic; V U^b 4 V ^■iii.'^x Si* 

» V e»y^ 6 sic; V J^U 7 V ^^\S s v U^^ s l.^";>H 

10 i»>«-«.«n 11 ^ _, .. < -^^ 12 IjJjli, sequent! lineu ,_yjy " Oniissi 

sunt vv. 11, 12, 13; sic jjinbabillter supplenda: ^yl ?lj( Z! :' "^ ■— -b^ U 
CrS*^"**' C)'"^ J^^i '2 i3^" ^' crtj-b-j b .. « -^ , ^ ^J.4u <*jt-o j.^' 
^Uj Jj.UJ-«3^ jJ^l bo >Xj«j C>^-^ i_A'*3 !■* J-?.^^'-M»-* jJ«l-i ^^-^->-' 

^^Lo* (>^,^k^ tXl«i« ^«*-*o ^.^oo\i» 

[Gen. 5, 14—32; 6, 1] Part II, Section III 43* 

xb »>J^li ^v-L»j ^.^^5 ._y^->^ J-^.^-^s-* i^'^J 15 

j-.,sj«.i*»j'« L<. c-^ » ^,1*0 ii-c ^U-3 J^.^^'-^i-* ^} 5-v*^ CUiKs 17 

^-j^JLi i>,J«l^ rf^-U^ ^i^ 0>'"*^ Ti^^ ^■xi^ l-^ j,jL5 >)lj ^^'■^ 19 

^^.vo |^.^vX..vj ft U,<»,.» -^ ft d-..^A^ d^X^ kil^o ^ <>-<^» » ^ I ^''^■«>^ d>o oIa 2 3 

*, ;Lo* iVj-'*-'^ v-XJ^ift ^wa-*aj 

ij^b« f''^*-^ fL»*' ^^-5 i^-Jftl i*-L.»j ^^ ^j.<.^.«,r>. j^^l _^ jL.o L^Llj 32 

1 1 jJ_5\ 2 i-y^^ ^ *\Lo)ji« 4 ^T*?. ' >J^3 

44* Text of MS. Vatic. Lihr. Ar. 2 (S) [Qen. 6,2—15] 

•^y* r^ o"^ "^-^^ c,-*5 r^."^' ^^^" j> V*-^ ^>>"^' li' ^"^5 ^ 
^^ IvJ'S ^JJl »*• 5jl./vi>. «-(^ C!-*-'^ ^L«J\ OL-^ ,j^ -ljiiL.> 

aU— 'I -'^^i yfcjJI fJwXJ 

<»-Jji jj »-^'5 ^^^3 J'j^' (3 j^Luo'S)! jX-o il <»JU1 ^jJS H 
4^k^i J=y"^> '*^^« J* 0-* ^-^^^i^J^ v^'JJ' ^;jU^V\ '"y^^ "UJl JUs 7 

<^l j^Jj Ih-^ ^^^ r^^ ^ 

cuib^ >'^5 ?'— ' o-r^ <*^.^" jJ^U 10 

I'O^U^* '>\ ^^i cr-:^ crr^ir^ -> J^^ '-'^ ->^ C-^ "^^ ^"^ ^^ 
^^5 J^l.> ^^— : Iat^* C1.'L«LJ> jL>..,,/o ,_^~:-i. Ijy'j' cU wX^l 14 

. , . .. ' - ^\ 

1 \^J.s?Jl3 2 y^i ' ^^j^i 4 ^-<ii. sic. Omittendum; videtur 
esse glossema, ad explicaiidum iram Dei, scil. <*-«> "exarsit", tandem ex 
margine iuvectum in ipsum textum' ' \^tsv«l e <».« a -> , sic! 

" fli., sed cfr. supra V. 32 ' ^J^,>.XLi^ i ^lUJJ^l^ m O-^-^** 

[Gen. 6, 16—22; 18, 1—9] Part ll, Section III 45* 

bb I43J r-J^j .^XjJI ^-j^ l^gXCSo *Ui ^'» '■'•t:-^ OybsXJ ;-^^l« 16 

L«3.3oUiJ' c:^l_ji'_j ^l_jj'3 J-il-^' Ua-oLa. ^^ 
^^j i^ ^^ ^ JU*NJ J=;NJ1 J.» Ul o'^jk^ CjI Lil U5 17 

LtL&^ d^^>o js^^mO ft 
ii> J^'^f'. J^> cr" ^^'53' r^-l' «■:^=^ cy° Cj=- ^ c^i ^9 

cU >j,^S^ ^XL.J1 <C^3 jSy. fUk ^ ^^^ oU 3.-^ c^\^ 21 
L.^r'i^Jl t_jl^ ^^l-^ ^*j ^^-^ J^y-? c^ "^-^^ *■-' J-?^3 1 XV III 

_^ I, '^ 

viSJi Aaj l^-vi«J" pi' (»-5b_jAJ' Ugj 1^A-U*JJ ;.^ iy^ j»5j ,J!sl^ o 
si;;ij" J^b ^s_j-^^l J '^3 i';'-^ ij' * >y<>-J'^ ijl (.-^IjjI tr^^ ^ 

^^-o ^> Jj>^^ i.J^^ ^Xi\ J-s:*-''^ bLJ^ l-U».w J>.^l p 8 
Uil jj ,_5*b«i ijli kiUii..«i3 isjl^w j^_\ lyis I'i 9 

' ^■''-Tr*' ^ CU-Ol^ 3 '^ sequenti linea <>JL;.*o < .>,s.\.*05 

46* Text of MS. Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 (S) [Gen. 18, 10—26] 

S) li v:;^*^- ^^^~:^ o' ->-*?* *^.^ '^x— »-' j »;-^ 


fiU. Ul U »^U» cr* '->' ^-i^i^^ ^\ J Us 17 

"i^Jj ^Uhftsr?. -.Is sj^jo .iJobl. d^^wO .^»-ww^ <>J\ »J>il L)l. 19 
,Jo SJvi. '-< »-0«>l_^V <»JJ1 larS. i^^iLa. »^'5 J>''^W 'y^*-»^ "'^^ 

l^Xij. i^^.^ h t ,>jJ '^j^jii^ii.. -is' >^U« f^'J>-»^ r'"** ^^^ (JUi "iO 

^IkJl »x JLaJl >iU4^' L-Jot J Is, ^yl fJLiUi 23 

M JUJ\ j,^,^ ^U.t -iU^ ..luJl JlkJ^ ^U»J\ ^yUi JUJ\ 

i»^'. j 'J-Lo ^^.. =;. ,..>--■ j ".Ij->-^5 o-' ^^' ''^ J lis 26 

« *\^^ » J.»-rf s l ^ha-c- ?. • ,. (j •; .U< !■ deest 

[Gen. 18, 27—33; 50, 1—9] Part IT, Section III 47* 

1^1 (_$>>->. cr-^ fU^\ (^ 0'>^^ ■^ lift* (Jlj^ «— jb\ jj 1 do la.! '27 

l^».^^l .^...;-<^ Liliv>> *-«-»iJ. O^-^'J^^. lil-o j^j-o^^il JjJ 28 

M JLs oy^J* "^'-^ ^=>-y. C^* i.s-'^* J'-" "^^ '-^.' ■*5'^5 -^ 
'^ ^^^^, ^^1 ,_j^s <i^Ul ^^3 ^^^ (.^liJl J, :'*.:u-oo«l jji JL»^ 31 

<^J|^^ jjl jij., -_-jh^l» ~^l-jl ^M5 j^j^ ^ji L^ d.l}\ i^.<i^ 33 
■''Jj^'i d<,sit (_|-^ i*-ol <*«ij.3 ,_^ k_i.vo^. ^>_-^li 1 L 

i^Mi c:JJis^ 6gui 6i_^s-?. ^1 lXlnji i^.y^ >-i--y. ^'5 2 
^\ ^i JIS5 ^_jiy JT i_k--y. 10^ <)^iSo fij.i ^Oj^. dj 4 

^ W-^^S C>**r* (_j-«J^ ^A-i» Uisw 0>X=>-5 

?=m'5 1-5^' c*^'^ ^*^* o^J'^ o^*^ ->^ (3 iJ '■'<*-^./ 

i:'CUL^ U^ v^Jljl i^^^li >>.3i^l oy'J^ J^* '' 
> in margine + |^_y.--JOj\^ 2 ^;_,.-vXJj ^^i" ^j,^^ 3 CU^jijI 

48* Text of MS. Vatic. Libr. Ar. 2 (S) [Gen. 50, 10-22] 

^lj\ *.Jl.«-w L>fi»- ^'-oM S'*-^} l^X^ ■'\_;jiU^^ 1 » _« ht 

JL«.<y<oJ\ ijli^ ^i '^y^^i cJ^*-^ '"J'j* (J' ^".y^ "^-^^i 1^ 

i^Jj »^.»^ c--:^ ^-^"-^y. 

10 W jJl> II AV <.-:^j?l sic semper n W ^JJ/** cr* '^ W + >X*-o 

n W f-ta^i vib^'i) ^jjtX^ol 1 s \v ^^ jvi,^' ^^ \ viUu«J laW^Lji 
JO W *U.^ 21 \V AiJ\ ^_sl^\ ,^^1 22 \V »J'j ^ -' W )'^ 

[Gen. 50, 23— 26j Part II, Section III 49* 

\JUJ^\ i^\ '_^>;^Lo -"yj Uv.\ :< Lilly 2^.^J r?V^ 'vibj -3 

Ja^>5 '^'."(-^I^^J r^"( ^^\ sj'/Jl Jl ^J=_;^-" 'ii^ CJ- 

f^r>.\ *^J>-»J. " '\\' + (JLaJ 12 W ^xiUkaj la W — Lot ,^ 
14 ^^ 15 W 0>?^' 


ri-'cJ^iJ <Wl^ (J^s*-*' 3^5 <>-^-ii-^ ^« ii^sr^ -^ J"^^' C-JIS5 2 

^\ ^IXs ^1 ^JLJ .UJ\ JU5 3 
ijJiJlj yiii\ ^_o U-^ <UJ\ J-os\^ 'J^^ *J* y^' 'i^* r^'^ ■* 
U».U-s3 ^Is^ i'ow.^ Ci'^5 "^^ <*-»JJiJ\ It^. 'I'-feJ v^l W-/05 5 

^^ U^ ^LoU ^^JLJ, ^UJ> i^5 ^ IjJ^ <^;XJ dOJI Jl»5 6 

jJil CUS? ^JJ\ i:UJ\ ^..O U-j ^\ J-=^'5 JJ4> <«^l f^^S ' 

^u^ ^1 — « ^is^ LL->a. aj> <uii ^-oj(^ iU-: jJ4» <)aj\ l;--^ 8 

Lob' Lco l->.l,».o 

*U— Jl i:^s? ^iJl ^UJI .z-*^^} ^SS J6^ i.^U( _;43i^5 

iL-oLJl Cjrj^i>} ajkLsT" ,J> 
<JJJ\ y^\^ \jis^ kL^MI s-cla:* U;>» J=,\ * jUI <0J\ L^^^ 10 

^ij>. ^ »^jj lylj ^^i^^^-ioi. '-^LJ J>j^J\ ty^"^ "^^ J^3 ^^ 
^ <>JuUo ,_^ ^^ Sjjj \^' gjLo (-..Ju '^^5 <Mj.^» A «■•«> 

<»>~-^-=^ ^i-^ ^ A-^ »;P \;jlj ^ i:..;>i..a. "^Cjl^ J^j"^' ^::-^Jj«^ 12 

UJli' 'Lcy_ U.U-0 ^IS_5 *Uw< ^^IS, 13 
I i. e. iljJoVl 2 ^y-^^. ' ?^-?. * C^^ ' iJj'--^ 

[Gen. 1,14—28] Part 11, Section IT 51* 

^j_^ [.,^\ jJw^ j, 2^JLJ J,lAi <^;JI JI93, '<sJJ\ ixli_5 !•* 

OUb^ ^\J1 ^1 J*=^5 ^^JiAJ\ cr?.xr^' '^^ (3^5 16 

f^S^'5 J^\ OUob^ ^i-oNJI _^IJ15 ^l4=-J\ 
J^jMl ^s. j^^yiiJ" ^_jla. iU— J( >>J.=w ^ ^\ UaJl-^ij 17 

jji isjiUj j^^li^ i-^ t/'?-^ ^^'^•* ^^^^l jr^ "^^ *J^i 20 

j=j^J\ ^ ^\ j^^\ ^i^5 /^> ^ 

U^a. villi <i^xJl ^^^l^ U3..*v^s-? J=j\il u^.^5 "^^^^ d^^'i 25 

j;_)l-X..^ ^_^» ^j_-J^ Lv(g_«-io5 iXi^yai |^l-*Ji "j-^Na-J dJJ \ J Ij" « 2*) 

i2Loly5 l4^* l-:Jy:--'5 J';M1 L^l^ l;-^!^ ^*il ^ilS Lm^^^jU, 28 
J>j^)l ij.6 iJ\j^\ olfUJI _jiLo ,Jj>3 J>,\)1 *IlS 

' rubro colore, glossema 2 ^^^ a probabilius addendum est 
» ij^b °.f>?. '" rubro colore, glossemu " ^».^J^ 12 \ya\3^ 

52* Text of MS. Bodf Libr. Hutd. 4?4 (X) [Gen. 1, 29—31 ; 2, X- n 1 

^^ CjvO ajI> JsJj *U*JI j^ /''-~J5 J'j"^* ^.^=^5 i-y*^} 30 

7"=*^' v^-^-^=>- J^5 *4=>- ,,T~*J ''krj'i j ^^ JV"^* *^5 

l*4,Xij.j 5-^»=?-^ J'^'^'i iU-^> CU)^3o^ ^^irL J-^ 1 II 
aUI ^joI Uy. ^^ ^..^ J'J^^^i ^U-^^-ll 0>y '—'^ '-^* 4 

Ji C-w^. ^1 J^'3 Jiil iyijL iili' JJLJ.I j ^.^^-oj. ^;^l J^5 5 
^LS- fiN)^ \^ J>y\ J^ ^k-\ L. «)JJ\ ^M >b^l ^^yilLyi^a. 

>^ ^^\^ <)J^ JS"^J\ jJLs» ^1 Ji^ Ci^ )^ Js j^;jl_)_jj\^ 9 

,_^aJJI J^yi_ >i)Ujb J^-L^^JI jJj Uai> •'^<»5 

' i. e. \^ 2 ^\> J l4^\^ 4 jj etc. usque ad J-^"\ colore 
rnlji-o scripta sunt ' sic 6 co"loie rubro itorum ' ^1^ (sic) 

8 Ujb«>.^l 9 w>J-(^\ jJlj Los\ j_yfc^ glossema 

[Gen. 2, 12—20; 3, 1] Part II, Section IV 


k'l^l 5^'y _;43-^* iT^S 
^^^^Jl ^5^v» (3 *Xaa.^ i.'iX:L ^i.Jt ^LvJMl <A.^JI (_l)yi S.^\^ 15 

Aha :?-?■» ^i.«.A^ 

Ji-U J^^ ^y/Jl tj >y J^ Cr* ^-^*^^" f>> -^J^-"* sV 'i^^5'5 16 
Uy, U^.l ^_,i.s ,i^X/* JiLi ^) j^'^ j-f:^* ^j"^. ^J-J' •'^^^ O''^ 1" 

2gX.oXJi 5^i>.^ ^LwJ"^\ ^^. c>^ •>-^ ^* ^-~-:J <*J"^-'^ V^y* J'^^ '8 

U^l ^^ ^^ \ys^'^^ J'y^'-i t-y-=^ ^) '*^' d^^'i 1^ 

L^<-».)\ y^jj ^^.-^ L*.J.i <kj 
J^y^} Z-:r^=^i ;^1<.^1 ;^t ^ISJ^ j,iL%-Jl iU.-^l ^il L^^, 2tJ 

Ua.1^ 3L«i^ J^^l^ ^t;i ^jjl Cjly^ f>\ ^ .^Jlsc-^ ^JJl ^as 21 

•H'l^l U3.6J0I5 ^M ^^ »J.^l ^J.Jl jX-iJl ,i^W\ Oyi LjoI^ 22 

^" ^ (3-^^.5 <*^'« ^S'-^' ^LvJVl JyO »_.^,;.-*J\ \J^J«1 Jj».l ^^.,^5 24 

Urwlj J..w.:=. ^U)NJI U_jJo.5 
J»;Vl (3 ^_,XJI ^5a-y\ g>i.»a. ^^ *Ji»3 ^1 ilil C-ol^3 1 III 

<OJ\ Jlii 1>LJ ii'y\U ili\ cuJUi Uii,\ll ^yi Lvi)^ o^Jl 

•^J^ ^^ Nbo V (^ 

I j_j'«33 (sic) - (;_,Jl-a-^ 3 L»JJi 1 i*.t^I>\ s 'i\\y^\ 

U-laft ' liUJJi usque ad AoI^Ij omittenda s <*^\ » ^>-J^ 

54"^ Text of MS. Bodl. Libr. Sunt. 424 (X) [Gen. 3,2-17] 

^yyUl j, iiy. iJS ,^ J^li ^1 U^ jS ils^J »\^M\ cuJUi 2 
^Uli V <JJJ1 JlS ^y_;iJI i>--5 j, ^ ^\ >y^\ »;-*i' or* '^^ 3 

Ij^ O^^ '^ is^_j-eVJ ili\ CJLils 4 
UpJLUil ^^~-«^' Ua-^ ^IJ" ^y. UjJ Zs,t <*jl viUi^ 5 

..3, ,k^ Ji-\U Ul=j. ''^^l ^\ ls\^^J\ 0_;-Oili 6 

ii^^-^ ^w« la,^ Ikli* ^b^U Im>^I ^ji} U*:^ L»j(,T-^' CUsr^->la 7 

Ugj ly;^;-^!^ UtlkXi* cr?.;i^ H=-' "^^s c^-^^ 

Cjya ii».«.<.o» ■'(3*7? l/^J^t'"''^ ij ''')'-• *-^^ Ov^ Lj«.«-»o ^ «. V 8 

^^>_aJI ,^r^ ^-^ U~;i Ua"^1 St-'t'^ "^5 
^bji ^NJ O-^i* ^o.>JJ\ fi, UiiU liUi^-o CUj«.»x«) JUi K) 
CsiSl all ^J_^ ^by^ viXil ^y^l ^^-^ J^» ]* JJJI <JJ JUi 11 

^xil>\ ilil il_^NJ> >.:uJUi Ua ..UJjii ^ iyUJ <)JJ1 JUi 13 


j;^ C-ol ii_jj«Jwc IJ^A CUU.S >J->M ^>-^^ U.4.V1 i_l>yi JUi 14 

c>)^^ J.S. ^^.^_>i>.»;;i j=jNJl Ji^i^5 ^U> 0^5 (^Ua-JI 5-:^^^ 

(JoUi ^,X/oJ> CUiU OLwU »>-o_J l^aJ-**^^ L^gJ-wJ^ 

^^ojjj o^^^'^i Vtt^ '^7-^--=^5 '^r^ Jr^^ ^y^-^ J ^5 16 

' J^ bis 2 IJ36 = efr. II, 9 < p" etc. usque ad Jj*j?, colore 
rubro scripta, omittenda ' 5^ * »\\-<t"iH " v^ ,. » >g r uj 

Gen. 3, 18— 24; 4, 1—10] Part IT, Section IV 55* 

JiJ.1 ^,Arr>i^ J^^'j ^^.^..^o, \S^ CU CXUj^ 18 
^■^^^ ^* J!;'J> J' ^^' J J> ^>^ J^^ ^^^^<:^ 6j^.i 19 

l.-^VI ^5Lo 5:1 \jj^) k'Ua. djy.! ^:^\ U>3 2(J 

.A>xJ\ (jl L^^-5 J^'-?.5 isl-ri' ■>_^ i;^ J> -^l .^ sjo v>^' UiJ 
^1 J:._;NJ1 J->*.J j..;^^! 'Vy/ Cr^ ^J^J* sV* 3<*^yLls 23 

i'L-jLl >^ i3?^ ki.sir^' A.ttk.a.;.„.l I i,^>j^^ \ 
•''LL»i..X.Mjl iJUJls^ c?-^-'^" ^>^55 OJ-«.s* \_jik. AJ'\-<il ji>\ ^^ li" 1 IV 

^^■j;^^ J='j'^* O't^J 1:^--° '*JJ * ijS i:,--oli ^\ ^LjI J^jo iJjJ,s? .S 

CUkiuo^ \J.^ ^^yi ^L» slj.l^ (Jl "^5 O-r:?.'^' li' j-^r. ^^3 ^ 

i_ukiC«j >X3 ^5 Lil^ L«j,»i^ 0;-~» fJ cx4^ ^'^^'^ 'Hr'* Jlji* 6 
<».XXiii i-^~^ J^}^ <J' J=-^ C>-^^ o' .Ljui.^1 (3 tils' 

j-«Jl ^_jaI c-^J JUi J^l J-oLa ^* ^\ i:^-^UJ .iJJ\ JUii 9 


l.><s^l^ ■: ^^ ^ .*.^^ etc. usque ad ^f>ji rubro colore 
distincta * ^yj\SJ\ s sic 6 ^^ilMs 

Bhose, Arabic Pentateuch iu tLo Church of Egjit. 12 

56* Text of MS. BoHl. Libr. Hunt. 424 (X) [Gen. 4, 11— 26; 5, 1] 

^> CUJl^5 UU vJU«=^ 2^1 j>y4\ ^w. ,JUi\ ^yJ- »^MU 11 

ci ^r^ o' C-- c^> c^ '»J'-'' sV^ cr^.l^ J^ 13 
jJjLo ^;~JlJ> JJJCi j^ Ji IJ.X* ^^ ^_j^ *J"^\ Jjyi JUi 15 

^Lo y^ Cy^-^ '-"-^^ i_r^V^ '*^ 0->J«i ..lUJi-js? <So\-«l j^^^^.l* '-*t*3 1 7 

^yi\ d^^l jfwb 1^1 , --'J 
J^iiyL. J..-j>'^l4^ ^^5 J^^oM^L^x ^'^^ JJ^^ •l*^^*^ cPy* J5)J5 1^ 

^;^-^'^\ <_j,Ua*ll j, ^~^' — U b» ^;^15 IJjb ^ J-Jy. <Ui\ OjJy 20 
Aijj«H.J\^ r*r^' *-''' r*^' i3>^' o^ '•^* J'^y ^"^' r^'^ 21 

^IsT^ J«<1* il^Xji. iiiJi^b b\po jUai J-fJy OjJ^ »U-o^ 22 

<i>. •»> J~^i>J C-,->.U Jo^xi.\k 

^^j^ls <)d;oi ^JJl J-^^-* J»y ^1 ^ii-~-J (J f^^ <*^l >£>* aJj'j 
».w\ iyjo ^\ i_,^^^ IjvA ^y^ <J^.,-^I Ujj Lo\ •>c-..*-iJ ^L-oj 26 

ijy^ f>\ ^yj <*^l 3^^ ^>^* f>rr'* t3 tr**^' v:;i>^ k-i*"*^ \Jub 1 V 


' O^ '' yj'^^ ' U*.^*.' * J-;^y. sed cfr. v. 22 

fXa.\^ v.:X-j^, sed cfr. V, 3, 4 sqq. 

[(Jen. 6, 2—21] Part II, Section IV 57* 


^^Loa ^^-^.aaJ j..«X* Loitt ^«*..**J <^3 L.9.A..M.O ljJ3.J».-*..ij.;^ ^l!--.>^»W (»».i ' d-J)^^*^5 ^ 

i/^Loli <^ ^55 ^>^-**j i^^>-s»-i*--> tt <^,.Lt^ ^^L* ij^^ lJ^ 5 

iJjLo ^ ^yL.uj -xixft (») ^,Lw i)k.!>Lo j-cvo v_)Lols ^l.' L« g.>^r>. jj_>fe« 14 
[i^b <^J j-J^j *.-Uj i^,^;^*^^ i.c».^^fi. J.i\IU.«3^ ''lT''^^ 1'^] 

aJ jJ^^ a.X*v ^Lo i^L^i j.^:L\ <^J >xJ« L« ij^Aj ^^j^ ijb ^'^5 19 

^'^3 C>3-*^ 

' 3^>.=»- 2 Hie incipit vetustior pars manuscripti ' Hio versus, 
fallente baud dubie oculo, praetermissus est in manuscripto * ^^iXi^ 
5 ^y>.^'Sy 6 vel »-^? 


o8* Tfxt of MS. BoiU. JAhr. Hunt. 424 (X) [Gen. 5,22— 32; 6. 1—4] 

aJ ^j 'w« jo«o ^^ J-''^} ^^ f^'^ ^^-y^ ^y^^^ CJ-'^^i -'- 

*j_^ '^w;^Xw^ <>..>.>.ir^^ ii>L»i:)j' ^»-^' flj* g..» -^ ^;^ls^ '23 

lljfc. U.>.JI ^\ -<)^Jii^^ <UJ1 ^w>o ^^~o AJ^-^ r?-^' Cf'**^'^ ^^ 

Lol <0 jJ*s aJ-^j ^^;^Uj'^ ^-_»-o'\^ ii'oo cUJ 1^1*5 -8 

,UJ\ '^^...oJ ,_^\ ^i^Ml 
... .-^^ iiLv- , .'..=^. _v aJ jJ» U >>-jus ..--> viUJ , i>U» 30 

A./L>o ,-»..ot->-»i« ^•^'^*' '*i'-< 5-^-*^' i^^-»J ^•^■* '-* g.«;<J^. v^'^* 31 
viUsb. f '-=^; f '-~' <*J ^•►^ <*.-^ iOLc ^.. <,rv, ' j^> 1 _v> ^;JlS« 32 

^jj\ iij^u^oLo ^j^i Mjti^^iLjicu^ i->jv^: i-^iy^,, 2 

t^^ "Ui^'l^ £,^1 iMJj^ '-''c;^--^ c>-^l J-^' J^l 

^|_y^;>wC»»--«-J 1 ^J^JI S-SUil 1>V~« ^i"^^ '-***^ 

1 ^^.«.>«)^ '- dJujS 3 j^«^L»J^ 4 melius: Lojjo , sed cfr. 

DofY, Supplement aux Dictionnaires Arabos, 9. v. *i^, consolatio 
^ ^y»^>^^^ c desuiit in textii " ^^ ' Jj'^ usque ad O'-^ 

,_J-oU : superscriptio duabus lineis in mauuscriplo exprcssa ' J"?^! 

10 ^_^ u forsan cr;o,lSV u l^^j u ,_^ u ^\ 1; j^jL-^a. 

" Cr??.'^ fortasse? 

[Gen. 6,5— 20] Part II, Section IV 59* 

3y>l JJ^ 31 <UJ1 2,_i*gU 6 
[AJU*b dJj dJJ\ ,_^^. ^U !iajM 9] 

12^- 12J:,^N)\ 12^.;^.^ 12 J^ 0->.-^ J^ JyV\ ^1^ aji ^1 ^1,5 12 

^UH i:',iiXi' .iUiJI fX-ol^ i_...-ioi. ^.^ tsai C^\ ^ 5-UsU 14 
1^^'". ».T^ ^^^^^^ "db^ iiU-Xlo (i^J^t it.^^^xj^ jXXjUI j-UsI \JX«,« 1o 

21Jj.\)l^ k^^NJI^ Ji--o^J> Li'lib'l ^ilAiJI fU-ol^ 

CSJ '*r^ i^ >-^ '^^^Tr' J'j"^' (J^ '■'• o'-'^i^J* J-**'_j* (j-^^ ^'^ 

(J=)V1 ^S ( )> L»K >_»■<>. .^ a l.»_^\ ij^^ »L»i.\ 

^yi v^jljt^ 'r-i^^-rr*^ cUJJl J^il cf-r^'* cj-r^^ H" <s'^ ^i '^' 

(^^-wb j-^.<j-o\ <v. «.>..»'- 4 j^llxl\ jj_j^ i^U L«a Cjb^ 
^^w^M <)^x.^ J'^'^J^ vj^ ^^ U^ 0-<5 lv«— ^- i<wioLJ\ ^^J 20 

1 ^bLkiL^ 2 oi-^li 3 desunt verba: laV^K 3S»n;i y"i»3 

* i^^\, fj^l^SX:^ ■■ i^laJ^JI^ 6 ^1 ' (.y'^^ ' desunt verba: 
ni n'l^W n^K ' etiam hie versus mancus 'u sic! " i. e. ^^V-~a\ 

12 oniittenda n ^^ib" '< (iJJ»\^ i5 j-^bi. 16 ^-j^yj^ 17 ^lj> 
18 X^j^f his i» b\j>\^> Bic '» ^1 Ji Li*^'j 

60* Text of MS. Bodl. Libr. EuiU. 424 (X) [Gen. 6, 21— 22; 18, 1-14] 

^_ftJ^\ UjJ J'^i iliiJi J-=^*'' h^ (J* J^-*.5 1*-^*;^* d.T**''^ ^ 

Jl ,)^>. ^..y^ J^^ Ij^ JUJ\ "^^....^. J\ ;..^^^\ ,_,^5 7 

d^jk^^^ CX^5 O '"' ^'^-^^ ^^ (_)-»^ Tt^^ >1^5 1*-^ '"i.T* '"^^ ^ 

••• I 

iliiJI ^ ,^ »4aJ Jli Clj\_^\ is^Uo ^^.l <iJ \^IS j^j" 9 
^ ,_^^ ^1 ;=.y Jj'XIl '3J^\ ^^ ^^^\ \J^ jiU l^lii 10 

j^-;* ii"-XXx~.< u*^ sj'.-j cu.i>..>~.>3 jJJ »jJj" Uo^ tjJ^ l-<3-*-«^ *^r^' 

£LM,^JJi ^^..^.^.^o v^hXJKJ 

lil^ ^T i6^"l i6^3a.\ CUJIS^ sjLo c,^;^?^ ^ li-r^T?"^ "^^ J'^ 13 
s \^h V««iU ' <>J>l9L> (5iir); forsan ^^.l-^. aut ^^'^Xjo^'?) s ^..oI 

[Gen. 18, 15— 31] Part TT, Section TV 61* 

J-ail ^^1 jojl U (.-^jJ^ ^>^■^* c-'* (_r*^* "^ JL" 17 

^\ sj>.j>j ^^yo *--^ J-*'^ '^■^■r^ i_y^>?- ^' <*^^ u''' cy° ■^•* 

')! fl Jl j-ji-o U^ ^*\ lyjLS L< (c^^J ^,Jii\ J^\ 21 

iJJ\ f\S^ Usl^ -.^_^1 0*^5 22 

^li»-J^^ ;\^M1 ai.t.j A:^-!^ :i^^^ij ill; li. Jlj'5 -►.:e'7^' ^■^' 23 

>Lc)^ t_)'rJ b\ Up'^ (_5J^ f'^s jJ-S31 1^1 Cj'j^^ ^s ^»_>1 JLii 27 

^^^.^JL>\\^ A <»■ «-i Ua--J ^IS nJ <OJl J Lii U.Lo |j_y.;0>J)l» <> ... «-ti 
^;_,^. ^ <UJl Jl» o^.^» Ut^:^ ^^^IS ^^li i_l,j b »^*^> JUi 31 

6 ^b». 7 \^AJIJ S ^^ 

62* Text of MS. Bodl. Libr. Hunt. 424 (X) [Gen. 15,32-33; 50, 1-18] 

dS.^^ i_|L.o yb^ <J^l A^^ ^ ^-r^ ^-^^y. 0*^5 1 ^ 
Jo. ^-J»la:^'\ j.b'\ J^" ^J>i' AjN Uy. crC^;' ''^ ■'5^=^*5 ^ 

Ley ,^w.O>.^.«^ r-^^^ t.i^^ ^^^^ 
<i>^ 0»*r» J^-^-^ ^j.-oU. i_A»^»J, lj''^5 <iJo»L<« fb\ 3lJi.-OJjlj 4 

^y-jJ i_jJ»» »3^ ^j.^ J c-Jls 

^y^ J^-y^ ^^^ --V*^ J'"'^^ <*wA-<^ V_i.»Oy ^JL'OJ 7 

\y^ b..y d)U» i^=wUi ^>^M\ ^ ^5 ,_^JJ\ '^U,\ ^^\ J\ ly\^ 10 
^\ r'"'^ Sj^^. g-OM-)^ <.lU> «-wl ly> viUi J-^l i;j^ 7"^^ J-*^ 

i.Ji— jy ^^_w< I'l^LL CjL* vXji »Ab\ j^l t_L»>!ni »yH "^'^|) UJ9 li> 
UiLX.^,^ <i.j sUX^ L^ Loy P^Jb£b ^_iu/j«j J-"-' ^^'^^ 

' sic 2 \^ JxXi\^ 3 (_j,..aiij\^ « J'^'^ ' *>?^ ' C.)'-^''^ 

• iU.1 ^ j»lV » forsan ^JJ> ^--o-* Oj*" ' *tf^ '" il) 

11 ylsk. 

[Gen. 50, 16—26] Part II, Section IV fiS'' 

LJ J'jj <^^yo J---S ULJi^ ^b\ ^\ ^ ^^^'-^i ^-*--^y. (J' 1^^ 16 

_0J.U tMj«^l ,.a. j^.s ' ^^\ pC/o;Jl5 jJl^^Lj ^i_».;^.J IJyi 17 
<-A^yi, >SL^ ^ilibl ^OJ\ ^J^ ^i 3j,^^ LJ ^ij^ lie 2_ji.«j" 

dw.«lj>jl \^>>,3:^* 18 

i3>^^. ij-' 1^==^ x"^ ^ ^"^ "^'^ J^ ^ '~^ l_j^.«-»43^ (»X)' I L<l^ 20 

CUjU-LU «.aU-^« ~X^IaI »-^^=^. -iLojdal b'l ^-Jjl v_Sva- ^3 o"^'^ -^ 

^^la. (jjllj' »4y-^ ^1^ (^.'t^' i_s^' "-^5 >xJ^2 !S,>.J« <_suw_jj^ 1^'^^ 23 

^^l 1 ■>-"f.5 i3^^'5 f-^r?"^ i-i-J-a. ^J^Jl J'j"^^ (J' J')'^' "'-'^ 

^ ti^a.::^^ X^iiXs* I^,^^L*J r<*^3 kiUo ''^^^ I ^^^ i— i.-~>^, Obo« 26 

' forsan ^ fva-ol 2 l^ijij 3 ,>.sxXs? « yo • ^LS' 

llr^S ' 1 >»jl-i' 9 

^^j..-^! ^JJ ^-;-»»J( f-> 

xi.«A»o'rv<.5:3&tiiJ&fA.«-> -»•- 

U^. ' » 

fOJUm » OlfO^lE'rt^tA.lCMOV- V 

liilil. Vat, Copt, 2, i<. 




Printed by W. Drugulin Leipzig (Germany). 




^SOUTHERN teol°! ?'"o""a 

ericB ^--w_ 


000 464 38'